


— ——— as ~~ — Se ceainain dene taiceneedias in Ielleei ceili. detieilonendic Sieeitmetpatentitttatenn iil Weill inte hi ieamnaadaal 
e TE OOTY ent ren OE ao wap har ree eel 


i 


‘ SS SQ 
LRRAQa WSS x : RESINS WAAR AGG AKG 
SS SONS . SNR . S . : ENS = ; ASR . ~ mee te 7 Nos 2s . . 
— . WS S Wie » . SS . NN . 

AAS 


YELLE 


WY 


AN 
s 


*, 


a yf 
GALLO 
te 


: AS 


SHH ws 
A 


Sas 


SN 


SY 


\ 


SN 























ee 
v 








REESE LIBRARY 


OF THE 


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
DUC) ar MprcL ssc Vs 

Accesstons No. AULA Shelf wes 
a d do 








~~ 


























i {i . 





se ale ki: 


A->'.'. 
ar ey, 





Digitized by the Internet Archive — 
in 2007 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


https://archive.org/details/demosthenesagain0Odemorich 


DEMOSTHENES 


AGAINST ANDROTION 
AND 


AGAINST TIMOCRATES. 


Zondon: C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SON, 


CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
17, ParernosteR Row. 





Cambritge: DEIGHTON, BELL, AND OO. 
DLeipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 


DEMOSTHENES 
AGAINST ANDROTION 


AND 


AGAINST TIMOCRATES 


WITH 


INTRODUCTIONS AND ENGLISH NOTES 


BY 


WILLIAM WAYTE, M.A. 


LATE PROFESSOR OF GREEK, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, LONDON ; 
FORMERLY FELLOW OF KING’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, 
AND ASSISTANT MABTER AT ETON, 











en 
EDITED FOR T Wa Via PRESS. 


CAMBRIDGE: 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


1882 


[All Rights reserved.] 


Cambridge : 
PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SON, 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
yy, 


ZY ¥ 


FA 345 | 
Es AZ 
1SF2 
MAK) 


IN - MEMORIAM 
-FRATRIS + VNICI - DILECTISSIMI 
CVIVS - MORBO - INTERRVPTVM 
INTER - DESIDERIA - SVPERSTITVM - ABSOLVTVM 
SN 


ak 
NYNC - TANDEM - PRODIT 


OPVSCVLVM. 





PREFACE. 


OF the two Speeches included in this volume, the 
shorter, Against Androtion, has never yet been 
separately edited in England. The only separate 
edition of it appeared just fifty years ago in Germany, 
that of C. H. Funkhaenel, with Latin notes, Leipzig, 
1832. The other and longer speech, Against Timo- 
crates, has not been separately edited at all; though 
its composite character, and the uncertainty how far 
in its extant form it corresponds with the speech 
actually delivered, have given it a prominent place 
in recent critical discussions, A tolerably clear field 
is thus open, it has been thought, for an edition with 
an English commentary; and the close connexion of 
the two speeches both in subject-matter and treat- 
ment, extending even to the repetition of whole 
passages with only slight alterations, has suggested 
the dual arrangement here adopted. It is proposed 
that the twin speeches now published shall be 
followed, as soon as other tasks permit, by the 
Aristocrates,.a speech of equal importance and 
W. D, b 


vii: PREFACE, 


equally (it might be said unaccountably) neglected 
in this country. 

A further inducement to the selection of these 
speeches has been the desire to familiarise the 
English student with their many rich illustrations 
of the principles and practice of Attic Law. This 
is a subject to which the Editor has been led to 
devote special attention in connexion with the new 
edition, now preparing, of Dr William Smith’s Dic- 
tionary of Antiquities. Had the available English 
aids to this study been more recent than they are, 
they could not compete in freshness and interest 
with the exploration of the original sources in 
writings which are not only perfect models of Attic 
style and forensic acumen, but examples, taken from 
real life, of causes that have actually been fought 
out in Attic law-courts*. The Editor is not without 
hope that this book may fall into the hands of men 
who, while they have become trained lawyers, have 
not lost all their interest in their early studies, 
especially on kindred subjects. ‘l’o such men it is 
possible that some of the analogies (whether by way 
of comparison or contrast) with English law, here 
ventured on by one who has only studied that law 
as a citizen, may appear fanciful or overstrained. 
From such men he will thankfully accept correction. 


1 ‘Tt is not from mere dictionaries of antiquities, nor from 
lexicons, however good, that such questions and practices of the 
Attic law can be fully understood.’ Paley and Sandys, Pref. to 
Select Private Orations, pt. 1. a 


PREFACE, irae 


At the suggestion of the Syndics of the University 
Press the same general plan has been adopted, with 
some modifications, as in the Select Private Orations 
of Messrs Paley and Sandys. This has involved the 
selection of Dindorf’s text in the Teubner series, taken 
from his third and latest edition (1855). Those 
teachers who may wish to place the text only in the 
hands of their class will thus be enabled to do so at 
a trifling cost’. The editions of which the various 
readings are given, are (1) the Zurich edition of 
Baiter and Sauppe, 1850, (2) Bekker’s last or stereo- 
type edition, 1854, and (3) that of Benseler, 1861. 
Within the limits of these texts the true reading, it 
is believed, will (except in the few corrupt passages 
where the MSS. fail us) generally be found. Benseler 
himself gives in his foot-notes a collation of the 
Zurich text (for which his symbol is BS = Baiter and 
Sauppe, in this edition Z), Bekker’s Berlin edition of 
1824 (B), his stereotyped text of 1854 (b), and Din- 
dorf (D). These foot-notes have proved of material 
aid in the preparation of the list of various readings 
here given, but have not been implicitly followed : 
the Zurich text, which also notes its own variations 
from Bekker’s Berlin edition, has been collated inde- 
pendently. It has not been thought necessary to go 
thirty years further back, and give the readings of 
either of Bekker’s early editions, Oxford, 1822, and 


1 The Teubner text of Demosthenes and the other orators may 
be obtained in parts as well as volumes. The Androtion is in 
Vol. 11. pt. 1., the Timocrates in part 11. of the same volume. 


b2 


x PREFACE, 


Berlin, 1824. As a textual critic, Bekker deserves 
especially to be judged by his latest and best work. 
Those who are familiar with his text of Plato, which 
he never revised, will know how much he left to be 
done by later editors in the way of selections from his 
own vast apparatus of various readings, and discrimi- 
nating deference to the best MSS.: other authors, 
such as Thucydides and Demosthenes, he went on 
polishing and improving until he had arrived at his 
final results, and then stereotyped them. It is not 
denied that Bekker, in the text as here exhibited, is 
too often carried away by excessive admiration for the 
Parisian MS. > (or 8S); several instances are pointed 
out in the notes; but he is at least more independent 
than the Zurich editors; and the best corrective of 
_ the occasional vagaries of both texts is, in my opinion, 
the judgment of Dindorf, more robust and self-reliant 
still, Apart, therefore, from the convenience of the. 
Teubner series for general use, Dindorf’s edition, 
though not, as Messrs Paley and Sandys point out, 
claiming the authority of a textus receptus, is perhaps 
the nearest approach to it? Benseler’s text is a 
curiosity, but it has nevertheless been thought worth 


1 Instances of Dindorf’s happy audacity occur T. 31, where he 
alone retains Gde.av Tod uh Te waety in place of the tasteless rod ru 
mabetv: T. 141 wreiv: T. 152 ravry: T. 156 5h for dv. In one or 
two places regard for Attic usage has compelled me to protest against 
the reading of all four editors: e.g. dvécxecbe A. 68 for the qvéoyerbe 
of old edd., including the Oxford Bekker, and all MSS. except 2. 

2 The new edition by H. Weil unfortunately stops, at present, 
just short of these speeches: the two volumes published extend as 
far as Or. xxi. 


PREFACE. x1 


preserving. After the humorous protest of Shilleto’s 
preface to the de Falsa Legatione, it might be thought 
that the Zurich editors could hardly be outdone in 
devotion to MS. =: but Benseler has accomplished 
this feat. Of his few notes, no small proportion is 
occupied in finding reasons, more or less ingenious, 
for following > when it leads him like an ignis fatuus 
into a quagmire’, 

In two passages there has seemed to be sufficient 
reason for departing from Dindorf’s text. One of 
these is in T. § 59, where Dindorf has omitted the 
concluding words of the “law” which, like other recent 
scholars, he brackets as an interpolation. The more 
closely I examine these inserted documents, the less 
reason I see either to correct their Greek or to bring 
their statements into harmony with what we learn ~ 
from other sources. It may be doubted whether 
some Germans have not gone too far in acknowledg- 
ing even a partial admixture of genuine material 
independently of the speech itself. It seems best, 
therefore, to let the text stand for what itis worth, as 
it appears in the MSS. and all other editions. The 
other passage, T. § 195, is one of thirteen in which 
Dindorf has followed >, sometimes with the support 
of other MSS., in reading aicypoxepdiav for aicxpo- 
Képdeav. It is of course possible that Demosthenes 
may have used, for reasons known to himself, a form 
so contrary to analogy, and that = may here repre- 
sent a genuine tradition: but the editors most devoted 


1 Examples of this occur A, 70, 78, T. 9, 110. 


xii PREFACE. 
to = have shrunk from this conclusion, and Dindorf 
again stands alone. 

In the Notes my object, like that of my pre- 
- decessors, has been to afford full help without unduly 
encouraging “the less industrious sort.” With this 
view some pains have been taken in so arranging the 
matter that the commentary may be read through and 
not merely referred to. The intention, at least, has 
been to give an explanation of every real difficulty, in 
one way or another but not always in the same way, 
to those who will be at the trouble of looking for it. | 
The abstracts at the beginning of each paragraph 
have, as in the Select Private Orations, been utilised 
for this purpose: and a hint thus conveyed has often 
been substituted for more literal renderings in the 
notes. There is still, I believe, in some quarters a 
prejudice against full explanatory notes, under the 
idea that the student should be left as much as 
possible to quarry his own materials. The Germans, 
who cannot be suspected of wishing to encourage 
slovenly methods of study, have lately in their 
school and college editions set us the example of 
liberal help in the vernacular*: while both the 
English Universities have of late given full sanction 
to this treatment of ancient authors. The chief and, 
I hold, amply sufficient reason for thus facilitating 
the acquirement of scholarship is the immense pres- 
sure of modern subjects and consequent limitation 
of the time which can be devoted to classics. In 


? As e.g. Stein’s Herodotus and Classen’s Thucydides, 


PREFACE. xiii 


the days of a narrower curriculum, lads of the right: 
sort might safely be encouraged to bestow long hours 
on the Latin writings of the great critics, or on 
notes so framed as merely to excite curiosity without 
satisfying it. If the amount of quartz to be crushed 
was large in proportion to the gold to be extracted, 
the exercise itself was healthy and bracing. Such 
studies are now unavoidably relegated to the time— 
if that time ever arrives—when the work of the 
specialist has succeeded that of general education. 
For the same reason, the old prejudice against 
the use of translations has become considerably 
modified of late, especially in the case of authors 
read only by the more advanced students. It has 
been assumed, therefore, that the excellent trans- 
lation of the late Charles Rann Kennedy will be in 
the hands of many, if not most, of the readers of 
this book: and it has been thought possible oc- 
casionally to improve upon his renderings. His 
version is indeed nearly perfect of its kind, as 
Mr Sandys has called it: but it is the work of a 
- most consummate scholar, as well as of a very able 
lawyer, produced under great pressure of time and 
consequent liability to oversights. It has been 
compared throughout with Benseler’s translation, to 


1 Besides the valuable appendixes to Mr Kennedy’s complete 
translation in five vols., his earlier volume of Select Speeches (the 
five Guardian Speeches), 1841, contains an important series of 
notes on Attic law, not reprinted in the collective edition, and 
dating from a time when aids to this study were almost non- 
existent in England. 


xiv PREFACE. 


which some of the corrections are due. The German 
version is naturally the more leisurely performance : 
it is the work of a man whose whole life was given 
(as Mr Kennedy’s was not) to philological studies. 
Yet the comparison is not, on the whole, to the 
disadvantage of our countryman, whose judgment 
often strikes me as superior to Benseler’s in the 
choice of conflicting interpretations. I can scarcely 
venture to criticise German style; but apart from 
its great accuracy Benseler’s translation appears to 
me to be both picturesque and suggestive, and I 
have sometimes quoted from it, 

The Orators have been specially reperused for 
the purposes of this volume and of kindred studies ; 
and it is hoped that something appreciable in 
amount has been added to the illustrative quota- 
tions which, like the edicta translaticia of the 
Roman praetors, have been handed on as common 
material from one Variorum edition to another. 
This will be found to be more particularly the 
case with the Timocrates, the industry of Funk- 
haenel having already done so much for the An- 
drotion. The aim has been to illustrate Demo- 
sthenes as much as possible from himself; his 
self-laudations are checked by the invectives of 
Aeschines, Deinarchus, and Hypereides; among the 
other orators Andocides, Lysias, and Isaeus are 
especially valuable as sources of Attic law; and he 
sometimes pays Isocrates the compliment of imitat- 
ing him. The Orators are quoted uniformly from 


PREFACE. xv 


the editions in the Teubner series. To the sections 
($$) of this series, which are those of Bekker’s Berlin 
edition, have been added, in the case of Demo- 
sthenes, the usually cited pages (Reiske’s). In refer- 
ring to the less voluminous orators, or to the two 
speeches contained in this book, the pages are omit- 
ted’. The Dramatists are cited from the fifth edition 
of Dindorf’s Poetae Scenici, 1869; Grote’s History 
from the eight-volume edition of 1862 (earlier and 
later are in twelve). Other editions do not require 
to be specified, or are included in the Select List of 
Books appended to this Preface. 

The grammatical references are mostly to Madvig’s 
Syntax, translated by Browne, and to Prof. W. W. 
Goodwin’s Moods and Tenses, both works remarkable 
for their common-sense treatment of syntactical 
questions’: sometimes to the larger materials of 
Jelf, after Kiihner. 


1 The sections of the Berlin edition are now invariably used in 
foreign books of reference, e.g. Pauly, or Daremberg and Saglio, 
and latterly in this country as well, e.g. by Paley and Sandys. 
English scholars of the last generation, such as Thirlwall and 
Grote in their histories, Shilleto in his de Falsa Legatione, 
followed the more minute subdivisions of the Oxford Bekker: and 
as Shilleto’s book is in the hands of most students of Demo- 
sthenes, I have usually given the double reference in quoting from 
that speech, e.g. F. L. p. 413 § 230=255. In these cases the 
higher number is Shilleto’s (=Oxford), the lower Teubner’s 
(= Berlin). 

2 No one, it is to be hoped, now believes that ef cov crepndd 
Soph. Oed. Col. 1443 occupies a ‘category of modality’ between 
el crepndelnv and jv crepnO: see note on T. § 39. 


Xvi PREFACE, 


I am indebted to the kindness of my friend 
Mr Sandys, Public Orator in the University, for the 
loan of some valuable tracts on Greek Law and the 
knowledge of others. 


Wo We 


Lonpon, 
October, 1882. 





ERRATA. 


The following are believed to be the only ones which affect the 
sense: they may be thought worth correcting with the pen before 
using the book: 

In A. § 34, note on devaxifew, line 7 from end should read 
‘ pevax. TL and devak. Tid. Te are rarer.’ 


In T. § 169, first note, line 2, read ‘from one of ws common. 
folk.’ 


SELECT LIST OF EDITIONS, DISSERTATIONS 
AND BOOKS OF REFERENCE 


ON THE TWO SPEECHES INCLUDED IN THIS VOLUME. 


TEXTS. 


(1) J. G. BAITER and H. SAUPPE. Oratores Attici; in one 
volume 4to, Zurich, 1850. (2) JMM. BEKKER. Demosthenis 
Orationes; stereotyped edition, 8vo. Leipzig, 1854. [Earlier 
editions, not here referred to, Oxford, 1822, and Berlin, 1824], 
(3) W. DINDORF. Demosthenis Orationes, editio tertia correctior ; 
(Teubner) Leipzig, 1855 [reprinted in subsequent years and ap- 
parently stereotyped. Impressions of different dates show the same 
misprints. Earlier editions, not here referred to, Leipzig, 1825, 
Oxford, 1846]. (4) G. HE. BENSELER. Demosthenes’ Werke, 
Griechisch und Deutsch, mit kritischen und erklirenden Anmer- 
kungen, 10ter Theil, Reden gegen Androtion und Timokrates, 
Leipzig, 1861. [His acknowledged work, though without his 
name in the title-page.] 


COMMENTARIES, 
1. GENERAL. 


(1) G. H. SCHAEFER. Apparatus criticus ad Demosthenem; 
London, 1824-7, [After Reiske, This is the ‘‘variorum”’ edition 
usually to be met with in this country. There is another by 
G. §. Dobson, London, 1828, xvi. vols.] (2) W. DINDORF. 
Demosthenes ex recensione Gulielmi Dindorfii; Oxford (1849), 
Vol. v1. Annotationes interpretum ad Or. 20—26. (3) WHISTON, R. 
Demosthenes, with an English Commentary [in Long and Macleane’s 
Bibliotheca Classica. Unfinished; vol. 1. (1868) contains Or. 
XIX— XXVL. ]. 

11. SPECIAL, 


C. H. FUNKHAENEL. Demosthenis Oratio in Androtionem ; 
Leipzig, 1832. 


LEXICOGRAPHY AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 


(1) HARPOCRATION. éées rav déxa pnropwr, ed. W. Din- 
dorf; Oxford, 1853. (2) T. MITCHELL (after Reiske). Indices 
Graecitatis in Oratores Atticos; 2 vols. Oxford, 1828. [Uniform 
with the Oxford edition of Bekker’s Oratores Attici]. Index 
Graecitatis Isocraticae; Oxford, 1828. [Uniform with the above], 
(3) P. P. DOBREE, Adversaria; cura Scholefield; Cambridge, 
1833 (ed. Wagner, Leipzig, 1875). (4) C. G. COBET. (a) Variae 
Lectiones. Editio secunda auctior, Leyden, 1873. (b) Novae 
Lectiones; Leyden, 1858. (c) Miscellanea Critica; Leyden, 1876. 
(5) J. N. MADVIG. Adversaria Critica; vol. 1. In Scriptores 
Graecos; Copenhagen, 1871. 


xviii SELECT LIST OF EDITIONS, &c. 
DEMOSTHENIC LITERATURE. 


I. GENERAL. 


(1) ARNOLD SCHAEFER. Demosthenes und seine Zeit. 
3 vols., esp. vol. 1. ch. 3, pp. 308—353 and vol. m1. part 2, 
Beilagen, pp. 63—65, Leipzig, 1856—58. (2) F. BLASS. Die 
Attische Beredsamkeit, 3te Abtheilung, lter Abschnitt. Demo- 
sthenes, esp. pp. 226—231, 244251, Leipzig, 1877. (3) R.C. JEBB. — 
The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, 2 vols., London, 1876. 
[Demosthenes only incidentally]. (4) S. H. BUTCHER. Demo- 
sthenes [in Classical Writers, ed. by J. R. Green], London, 1881. 
(5) J.P. MAHAFFY,. (a) History of Classical Greek Literature, 
London, 1880, Vol. 11. (Prose Authors), esp. ch. 11 (Demosthenes) 
and 12 (Contemporary Orators). (b) Social Life in Greece, ed. 3, 
London, 1877. [Drawn largely from the Private Orations]. 


Il, SPECIAL. 


(1) C. LL. BLUME. Prolegom. ad Dem. orationem Timocrateam 
tria capita priora, Berlin, 1823, pp. 48. [An inaugural dissertation 
on the Panathenaea of § 26; now out of print. Some others of 
the following tracts I have been unable to get a sight of, but think 
it best to make the list as complete as possible. All the periodicals 
here mentioned have been consulted]. (2) C.H. FUNKHAENEL. 
Symbolae criticae in Demosthen. tv. in Orat. c. Timocratem. In 
Zeitschrift fiir die Alterthumsw. 1842, pp. 311—316. [Superseded 
by later editions]. (3) T. H. DYER. On a passage in Dem.’s 
Oration against Timocrates. In Classical Museum, uu. 119—121, 
London, 1845. [Proposes a transposition of § 5, placing it before 
§§ 3 and 4. But this will not remove the difficulties of the first 
16 §§: see Introd.] (4) 4. WESTERMANN. (a) Untersuchungen 
iiber die in die Attische Redner eingelegten Urkunden. pp. 136, 
Leipzig, 1850. (b) Commentatio de iurisiwrandi iudicum Atheni- 
ensium formula quae exstat in Demosthenis oratione in Timocratem. 
Pars 1. pp. 20, 11. pp. 16, 11. pp. 14, Leipzig, 1858—9. [Three 
Academical Programmes. Westermann’s criticism led the way to 
the total rejection of the authenticity of the ‘“‘inserted documents’’]. 
(5) F. K. HERTLEIN. Coniecturen zu Griech. Prosaikern. 
Wertheim, 1862. [Programme of a Lyceum. Among the passages 
are Androt. § 37 and Timocr. § 16]. (6) RUD. DAHMS. 
(a) Studia Demosthenica (zur Rede gegen Timokrates), pp. 40, 
Berlin, 1866. [Programme]. (6) Emendationes Demosthenicae. 
In the Jahrbiicher fiir classische Philologie, vol. 93, pp. 674—8, 
Leipzig (Teubner), 1866. [The following are the conjectures best 
worth notice: Androt. § 33, raira dixaca (for Tatra), Timocr, § 201 
mdvtes ol av mov (for dravy mov). The last is a decided improvement]. 


(7) J. B. TELFY. Das rpocxardBdynua (Timoer. §§ 96—98). In 
Philologus 1860, vol. xvi. pp. 365—8368. [An improbable sugges- 
tion that mpocxara8\nua was an extra percentage paid by the 
farmers of the revenue]. (8) H. FROHBERGER. Annotationes 
ad oratores Atticos. In Philologus 1870, vol. 29, pp. 633—5. 
[Wishes to read ovx dwoxpvYoua T. § 200, retaining amorpéyoua 
in $§ 1, 104]. 


SELECT LIST OF EDITIONS, &c. xix 


GREEK LAW. 


(1) J. B. TELFY. Corpus L[uris Attici. Pesth, 1868. 
(2) G. F. SCHOEMANN. De Comitiis Atheniensium. Halle, 1819, 
(On the Assemblies of the Athenians, transl. by F. A. P., Cambridge, 
1838.) [Quoted by the pages of the original, which are also marked 
in the English edition]. (b) Griechische Alterthiimer, 3rd. ed. 
Berlin, 1871. Vol. 1. (the State) transl. by E. G. Hardy and 
J. S. Mann, London, 1880. Vol. 1. preparing. (c) MEIER and 
SCHOEMANN. Der Attische Process. Halle, 1824. [A new 
edition by H. Lipsius, much needed, is now coming out in parts. 
One part only has appeared]. (3) A. BOECKH. Die Staatshaus- 
haltung der Athener, 2nd ed. 1851, (Public Economy of Athens: 
translated from the 1st German ed. by Sir George Cornewall Lewis, 
2nd ed., London, 1842.) [This is the edition referred to; the 
2nd Germ. ed. was translated by Lamb, Boston, v.s., 1857]. 
(4) K. F. HERMANN. Griechische Staatsalterthiimer. 3rd ed. 
Heidelberg, 1841. (5) C.R. KENNEDY. (a) Notes (pp. 124—283) 
to Transl. of Select Speeches, London, 1841. [A scarce and 
valuable book; the notes are not reprinted in the collective 
edition]. (b) Zhe Orations of Dem. translated with notes and 
dissertations. 5 vols. London, 1880. (6) V. CUCHEVAL. 
Etude sur les Tribunaux Athéniens et les Plaidoyers Civils de 
Démosthéne, par Victor Cucheval, Professeur au Lycée Bonaparte. 
Paris (Durand), 1863. . (7) G. PERROT. Essai sur le Droit 
Public d@ Athénes. Ouvrage couronné par l’Académie Francaise, 
Paris (Thorin), 1869. 


Also articles in the following Dictionaries of Antiquities: 

(8) AUG. PAULY. Real-Encyclopiidie der classischen Alter- 
thumswissenschaft. 6 vols. in 8 parts, Stuttgart, 1837—56. [A 
new edition on an enlarged scale of vol. 1. A—B, Stuttgart, 1864. 
Greek Law mostly by Ant. Westermann]. 

(9) W. SMITH. Dictionary of Gr. and Rom. Antigq., 2nd ed. 
London, 1848, reprinted in subsequent years. [Greek Law mostly 
by C. R. Kennedy, J. S. Mansfield, R. Whiston. A new edition 
preparing. Joint Editor, W. Wayte]. 

(10) DAREMBERG and SAGLIO, Dictionnaire des Antiquités 
Grecques et Romaines, parts 1—6, A—CAS, pp. 1—960, Paris 
(Hachette), 1873—9. [Greek Law by E. Caillemer. The publica- 
tion of this magnificent work is unfortunately suspended]. 


MSS. OF DEMOSTHENES CONTAINING 
OR. XXII. AND OR. XXIV. 


= (or 8) in the Paris Library (No. 2934), on parchment, 
forma maxima; century X. ‘‘Primae quidem classis unus super- 
est Parisinus S. ” Dindorf. Praef. ed: Oxon. p. vi. By far the best, 
and now recognised as the proper basis of the text; for limitations 
to this doctrine, see the Preface. 

F. Marcianus 416, in the Library of St Mark at Venice, on 
parchment, forma maxima; century XI. The best ms. of the 
second group or family (Dindorf, wbi supra) but closely followed 
by B. 

f (or Y) MS., Par. 2935: on parchment, forma maxima. 

Q (or QO). In the Jesuits’ Library at Antwerp (No. 43), on 
paper, forma maxima. The nearest approach to 2, according to 
Bekker. 

k, MS. Par. 2998: on cotton paper (bombycinus), forma 
quadrata; century XIV. Closely approaches A}. 
= r. MS. Par. 2936: on parchment, forma maxima; century 

Ii. 

s. MS. Par. 2940: on cotton paper (bombycinus), forma 
quadrata. Agrees generally with A! and k. 

t. MS. Par. 2294: on parchment. . 

v. In the Paris Library (MS. Coislin. 339), on parchment. 

B™. [i.e. the second of eight mss. named after Morel, the 
Paris printer of the 16th century, and collated by Lambinus]. MS. 
Par. 2993. 

e™. [fifth in the Morel series]. MS. Par. 3000. 

Al, Augustanus primus, formerly at Augsburg (Augusta Vin- 
delicorum), now in the Royal Library at Munich (No. 485), on thick 
parchment, paene quadratus. Reiske made it the basis of his 
edition, and assigned it to century X. or XI.: Dindorf says XL, 
the Zurich editors XII. The principal ms, of the third or most 
widely-diffused group: see k and s. 

B. Bavaricus, at Munich (No. 85), on cotton paper (bomby- 
cinus), forma maxima; century XIII. Shares with F the primacy 
of the second class. 

. A contraction for ypd¢era:, the note of various readings, 

Of the above mss., t, 8™ and e™ contain the Androtion but not 
the Timocrates. 

As a general rule, only those various readings are noticed 
which have found favour with one of the four editors whose texts 
are collated. But in one or two instances attention has been 
called to neglected readings: and the mistakes and eccentricities of 
= have been freely exposed as a warning against excessive deference 
to its authority. 








SE LIBRAS 


OF THE 


UNIVERSITY) 






INTRODUCTION 


TO 


Or, XXII. 
KATA ANAPOTIONOS. 





THE speech against Androtion, B.c. 355, marks a 
distinct stage both in the outward career and the intel- 
lectual growth of the orator, as his earliest forensic speech’ 
in a public cause*, and the first in which he shows the 
full maturity of his powers. It precedes by a year his 
first recorded appearance as an adviser of the people in a 
strictly political harangue*, the speech rept rdv cuppoprdv 
(B.c. 354), But we see already the transition from the 
private practice of the Aoydypados to the public status of 
the pjtwp or politician. The ypady) tapavépwv or indict- 
ment for an unconstitutional proposal formed a meeting- 
point between law and politics; the elastic state of the 
law favoured the decision of legal questions on party 
. grounds ; and, as at various periods of English history, 
political differences found their natural arena in the law- 
courts, 


1 Nbyos Sixavixds. 2 Snudoios. * 3 cuuBovdeurTiKés. 


xxii INTRODUCTION. 


Into this arena Demosthenes now descended as a 
trained combatant. According to the most probable date 
of his birth he would now be just twenty-nine years of 
age’, His entrance into public life (marked by A. 
Schaefer and Blass as the second period of his career) 
coincides with the disastrous close of the Social War. 
The revived naval supremacy had been again lost; the 
orators of the peace party were discredited; and Demo- 
sthenes came forward as the advocate of an imperial policy. 
His position was already apart from that of all the rest’. 
Eubulus the leading orator of this party, and Phocion 
who lent it respectability *, had their opponents among the 
other orators: and Demosthenes was ready to avail him- 
self of help from any quarter against the predominant 
majority. But his quarrel was with the entire system, 
not merely with individual politicians; all were alike re- 
sponsible for the abuses of the Theoric fund’, for the 
fatal stimulus given to the pleasure-loving, home-keeping 
instincts of the Athenian people, and to their dislike of 
personal service; all alike, in his view, fattened on the 
public plunder®. Demosthenes had to educate, not his 
party, but his countrymen. Hence his repeated allusions 
to the glories of the past; to the days when “the public 


1 His birth is fixed with tolerable certainty at B.c. 384, Z.e. 
either in the last months of Ol. 98, 4, the archonship of Dexitheus, 
or the first of Ol. 99, 1, the archonship of Diotrephes. The An- 
drotionea belongs to the early part of Ol. 106, 2, the archonship of 
Callistratus (not the orator, see § 66 n.), ¢.e. July or August 355. 
Androtion’s motion to crown the senate was at the close of the old 
year, the trial at the beginning of the new. It is important to re- 
member that the Athenian year began at the first new moon after 
the summer solstice, or, speaking roughly, about July. 

2 §37n. 

3 Grote, ch. 87, viii. 32, 

4 Timoer, § 134, 

5 Androt. §§ 65—68, 


INTRODUCTION. Xxill 


service was the. only holiday'” to the Athenians whose 
degenerate descendants would now neither fight them- 
selves nor pay others to fight for them*. He does not, 
like many opposition speakers, confine himself to negative 
criticism. In this speech, and in others of the same 
group ‘‘against bad legislation,” the Leptines, the Timo- 
crates, he is the exponent of aformed policy. ‘Even when 
he is writing for others, himself remaining behind the 
scenes, the voice is still that of Demosthenes. His strong 
personality, his sincerity of conviction, breaks through 
dramatic disguises*,” | 

Androtion, the defendant on this occasion, had been 
a prominent politician for thirty years*. That he must 
have been advanced in life is clear not merely from this 
circumstance, but from what we are told of his associates 
Glauketes and Melanopus® and of his father Andron. 
The latter is certainly-to be identified with the Andron, 
son of Androtion, who is named among the codot assem- 
bled in the house of Callias, Plat. Protag. 315 ¢ (comp. 
Gorg. 487 B), and who must have been already a grown 
man at the breaking-out of the Peloponnesian war®, The 
political example set by Andron to his son was not edify- 
ing. Having himself taken part in the government of 
the Four Hundred, B.c. 411, he came forward as the 
accuser of Antiphon and Archeptolemus, who were made 
scapegoats for the rest, and actually moved the decree by 


1 Thueyd. 1. 70, § 9, wire éopriy adXo Te nyetcOae } 7d Ta SéovTa 
mpazat. 

* §§ 12—16, 76—78. 

3 Prof. Butcher, p. 31. 

4 § 66. 

oT, $126 ff. 

§ «“ The Protagoras points to the 87th Olympiad, B.c.432—429 :” 
Prof, Brandis, quoted in my note on Protag. 327 p. 


W. D. 'S 


Xxiv INTRODUCTION. 


which they were executed as traitors’. According to 
Demosthenes, he was imprisoned for debts to the State 
and passed zoA\ds wevrernpidas in prison*®; he broke his 
prison, not returning when let out on parole for a festi- 
val*®; and, haying failed to discharge his obligations at 
his death, left an inheritance of Atimia to his son, from 
which Androtion had never purged himself*. But this 
charge, as well as another presently to be noticed, is sup- 
ported by no evidence: it is even ridiculous to see Demo- 
sthenes attempting to throw the burden of proof upon the 
defendant’. 

- Androtion had been trained in the school of Isocrates, 
and became an accomplished public speaker®. Demosthe- 
nes himself, though he adopts a sneering tone, is a witness 
to his oratorical ability’. He took an active part in 
matters of finance, and acquired the confidence of the 
people, though in his case the arts of the demagogue 
appear to have been combined with no small amount of the 
personal insolence of a born oligarch. In the bad times 
of the Social War he brought forward a scheme of his 
own for replenishing the exhausted treasury *: he induced 
the people to appoint an extraordinary commission of ten 


1 Vit. x. Orat. p. 833". Harpocrat. s. v. “Avdpwr. 

2 T. § 125, where see note on the qualification with which this 
statement must be accepted. 

3 A. §§ 56, 68, 4 A. §§ 33, 34. 5 § 34, 

6 Suidas s.v.: “Avdporiwy “Avipwros “AOnvatos, pyrwp cal Snua- 
ywyds, uadnrys “Icoxparovs: a scholium on § 4 of the speech gor: 
yap ovros Twv Icoxpdrous uabyrav érlcnuos: Zosimus in his life of 
Isocrates, p. 257 ed. Westerm.: and several passages of the rheto- 
rician Hermogenes, all quoted by A. Schaefer 1. 316n. and Wester- 
mann ap. Pauly. 

7 A. § 4, dort yap, © dvdpes ’AOnvaio, rexvirns Tod Néyew, Kal 
mavrTa Tov Blovy éoxddaxev évl Trovrw, compared with T, § 158, 

8 Sia Tov Kkatpov és Hw TOT, § 49 n. 


INTRODUCTION. XXV 


members, none of them regular officers of the revenue, to 
collect all outstanding arrears of the property-taxes 
(eiogopat) voted since the archonship of Nausinicus (B.c. 
378-7)". He put himself at the head of this commission, 
Timocrates being his most active subordinate: and the 
proceedings of this pair of worthies furnish several lively 
passages common to the two speeches”. Their extraordi- 
nary powers lasted for a year; the services of other au- 
thorities were placed at their disposal, so that the Eleven 
imprisoned at their bidding, the Apodectae exacted pay- 
ment, and the public slaves kept the accounts®. Of four- 
teen talents of property-tax in arrear, seven were recover- 
ed (A. § 44), or only five according to the later version 
(T. § 162); and this at the cost of an enormous amount of 
friction and unpopularity*. Androtion, however, retained 
his influence with the people, tolerant as usual of irregula- 
rities and even of oppression when the interests of an 
empty exchequer were at stake; and not long afterwards, 
being probably tapias tis Geod or one of the treasurers of 
the Acropolis and all its contents, he procured a decree 
which gave him extraordinary powers for dealing with 
the sacred treasures’, The orépavo1, golden crowns pre- 


1 A. Schaefer 1, 317 makes them the arrears of Nausinicus’ 
year only: the reasons for preferring Grote’s view are given in the 
note on § 44. 

2 A. §§ 47ff. T. §§ 160 ff. 

3 tov Snudciov wapeivac mpocéypayev, A. § 70, which explains 
Tovs vnpéras, T. § 162. 

4 A. §§ 59—64. 

5 The expression rautas ad hoc in the note on A. § 70 requires a 
slight moditication, The rapla: rHs Geo were probably chosen by 
lot, and responsible for the safe keeping of the treasures, but with- 
out discretionary power as to dealing with them (compare T.$136n.): 
Androtion, as an active bustling politician, separated himself from 
his colleagues and got the vote passed which empowered him to 
melt down the crowns. 


c2 


XXvi INTRODUCTION, 


sented to Athens by grateful allies, and now hanging in 
the Acropolis, were then thrown into the melting-pot, on 
the plea that they were “coming to pieces’,” and recast’ 
as diadae or paterae: the whole operation was left in 
Androtion’s hands, without check or audit of accounts’, 
We next find Androtion as a BovAevrns or member of the 
Senate of Five Hundred; and it was in this capacity that 
he proposed the complimentary vote to the Senate which 
gave rise to the present prosecution. 

At the close of the Athenian year it was usual for 
the people to vote an honorary crown to the outgoing 
senators as an acknowledgement that they had discharged 
the duties of their office honourably and efficiently*. The 
“crown” must have been.of altogether insignificant value, 
apart from the fact that there were 500 claimants: but, 
like a modern “vote of thanks,” it was taken as a matter 
of course, and the omission of it would be a marked 
slight. This year, however, Ol]. 106, 1, Bc. 356-5, the 
senate was accused of having neglected an important 
duty. It was required every year to build a certain 
number of new triremes*‘; and if it failed to do so it was 
forbidden by a special law to ask for the customary an- 
nual compliment. The proper number had not been built 
this year: and the excuse alleged was, that the treasurer 
of the ship-builders (6 rapias tév tpinporowdv) had run 
away with two and a half talents of the public money’. 


1 ta pda drroppety, § 69 and note. 

2 airds frwp xpvooxdos Tapias avtiypape’s yéyovev, A. § 70 
and n. 

3 xahds Bourevoau, § 12. 

4 Twenty according to Diod. xi. 48; Benseler, Hinl. p. 9. 

5 On the question of the senate’s responsibility for this officer, 
see§17n. It is usually assumed that no ships at all had been 
built: but the sum named (about £600) is clearly only a fraction of 
what the Athenians must have been spending upon their navy 


INTRODUCTION. XXVvli 


This, it was argued, was a misfortune’ for which it would 
be cruel to put a stigma upon 500 honest citizens. An- 
drotion accordingly moved a decree in their favour, 
awarding them a crown as usual and saying nothing of 
the unbuilt triremes. The motion was carried in spite 
of the opposition of Meidias and others*; and Androtion 
was then indicted for an illegal proposal (rapavopwv) by 
Euctemon and Diodorus, two men who had private in- 
juries to revenge. Euctemon, apparently the older of the 
two, had spoken first: and Demosthenes wrote the present 
speech for Diodorus, who “followed on the same side.” 
The “counts of the indictment,” as they would now be 
called, were four in number: (1) that the requisite num- 
ber of ships had not been built: (2) that Androtion’s pro- 
posal was not approved beforehand by the senate*: (3) 
that he had led an infamous life, which subjected him to 
the penalty of Atimia or disfranchisement: (4) that he 
was again disqualified, as having neglected to pay the 


debt due from his father to the State at his decease. No . 


evidence is brought forward on either of the latter 
charges; both were probably unfounded ; and Androtion 
might well complain that such points were raised against 
him indirectly, instead of being made the subject of regu- 
lar indictments. Demosthenes’ attempt to meet this 
answer beforehand is, like some of his arguments in the 


during a time of war, and quite inadequate to provide even the 
rough hulls of 20 triremes. If the number fell short by five or six 
or even less, it is quite in keeping with the tone of the prosecution, 
which throughout insists on the strict letter of the law, to argue 
that the law had not been complied with, and suppress all details. 
The words of § 8 wy roncauevy TH Bovry Tas Tpinpecs (cf. §§ 10, 17), 
may easily bear that meaning, the article expressing the full, well- 
known, or legal number, like ai draywyai, T. § 113 n. 

1 drixnua, § 17. 2 § 10, 

3 By a mpoBovdcvpa. 


XXVlil INTRODUCTION. 


Timocratea, absurdly sophistical’; and may have con- 
tributed to the adverse verdict. . 
The form of the speech is determined by its character 
as a Sevrepodoyia, or subsidiary to the main accusation. 
There is no complete statement of the case for the prose- 
cution; that has been already made by Euctemon, and 
“the second speaker assumes the right to a freer hand- 
ling.” Without any regular proem Diodorus begins with 
an explanation of his motive in coming forward as a pro- 
secutor: he has as great or even greater personal wrongs 
to avenge than Euctemon (§§ 1—3)* All that is known 
of Androtion should prepare the jury for a quibbling and 
sophistical defence (§ 4). The speaker then goes on to 
anticipate the arguments which the defendant will pro- 
bably have recourse to. He will maintain, it is alleged, 
that in this instance the Probouleuma was not required 
either (1) by law, because the case is exceptional, or (2) 
by precedent, because the preliminary vote has not been 
enforced in practice. To this it is replied, that (1) there 
are no exceptions to the legal rule, and (2) that it is time 
that bad precedents should give way to the letter of the 
law (§§ 5--7). There can be no doubt that the practice 
had been as Androtion alleged: and there is great disin- 
genuousness in the way in which the contrary is sug- 
gested*, A third excuse will be, that the senate did not 
ask for their reward, but the people decreed it to them 
unasked. In answer to this it is urged that putting the 
question to the vote by the Proedri and Epistates, Le. 
by men who were necessarily members of the senate, was } 


1 On (3) §§ 28, 29: on (4) § 34. 

2 This is in order to anticipate a charge of bigodavetos see § 3, 
note on dmivec Oat. 

8 eva 8 ofuar wav odxt Néyerr adrov dd7nBeray (1. dAyO7), marAOV dé 
otda cagas, § 6. 


INTRODUCTION. XX1X 


in itself an act of asking; and further, that the unofficial 
members had gone about canvassing for votes and com- 
plaining of the hardship of depriving them of the usual 
compliment (§§ 8—11). He next insists on the para- 
mount importance of naval supremacy to Athens, as a 
reason why the senate should be held to the letter of its 
duties in the matter of the triremes (§§ 12-16). If it is 
alleged that the frauds of the treasurer could not fairly 
be visited upon the senate, the answer is, that the public 
interest requires that no excuses, good or bad, be admit- 
ted’: and further, that in this case the senate really was 
respensible for the acts of its own subordinate ($$ 17— 
20). 

Next follows the question as to the defendant’s im- 
moral life. He may urge in reply that the question 
ought to have been raised directly by way of impeach- 
ment, with the usual securities against malicious prose- 
cution, and not by innuendo as a mere collateral issue. 
The rejoinder to this is, as has already been noticed, one 
of the weak points of the speech (§§ 21—24). In other 
matters the Athenian law allows the prosecution a wide 
choice as to modes of procedure. J¢ is for the accused to 
prove lis innocence, not to dictate the particular remedy . 
to be set in motion against him (§§ 25—29). The ground 
of the law of Hetairesis is next explained: men of in- 
famous life cannot be well affected to democracy, and 
must attempt either to corrupt or to deceive the people 
(S§ 30—32). With regard to the other disqualification 
of Atimia inherited from his futher, the burden of proof 
rests with Androtion, that his father did not die in debt to 
the state (S§ 33, 34). The feelings of the senators ought 
to count for nothing when the public interest is concerned. 


1 We are reminded of Wellington’s saying, that ‘those who 
are good at excuses are seldom good for anything else.” 


XXX INTRODUCTION. 


They have themselves to thank for it, if by abdicating 
their own functions and submitting to be ruled by pro- 
fessional speakers they have incurred a formal censure: 
in fact so splendid an opportunity of getting rid of ‘‘the 
orators” ought not to be missed, and is alone enough to 
justify a conviction (S§ 35—39). 

The speaker now passes from what Androtion may be 
expected to say to what others may urge on his behalf. 
That he will be defended by wen who are either mem- 
bers of the censured body or responsible for the loss by 
embezzlement is a matter of course: but neither they nor 
the “respectable’” Archias are disinterested on this oc- 
casion (§§ 388—41). By a somewhat abrupt transition, he 
then returns once more toa last argument of Androtion’s: 
that, by undertaking to collect the arrears, he had volun- 
tarily incurred unpopularity for the good of the public 
(S§ 42—46). The first part of the speech, mainly occupied, 
as we have seen, with conjectures as to the probable line 
of the defence, here comes to an end. 

The orator now announces his intention of passing in 
review the whole of Androtion’s political career, and 
begins with a vigorous invective against his conduct in 
the much vaunted collection of the arrears of property- 
tax*. The point is first argued with reference to the 
case of Euctemon ($§ 47—50), then more generally; and 
Androtion’s conduct is compared to that of the Thirty 
(§§ 51—55). Instances of his outrageous behaviour are 
quoted (§§ 56—58); the amount of offence given is con- 
trasted with the paltriness of the results, and shown, by 


1 ériecxyns, § 40 n. 

2 &d' @ péyiorov ppovel, Ty Tav Xpnuarwv elompagiv, § 47. This 
second part of the speech is repeated almost exactly in the Timo- 
cratea, §§ 160—186, and its presence there forms one of the criti- 
cal difficulties of that speech : see the next Introduction, 


INTRODUCTION. Xxxl 


the example of Satyrus, not to be inseparable from the 
discharge of these unpopular duties (§§ 59—64), So far 
from being a patriot and reformer, he has been, during 
his thirty years of public life, identified with the existing 
system and all its abuses (S§ 65—68). The concluding 
paragraph (§§ 69—78) deals with an exploit of Androtion’s 
which he claimed as one of his services to the state, his 
melting down of the votive golden crowns and recasting 
them as paterae or bowls; this is shown up in its true 
colours as an act of gross fraud, from the want of proper 
supervision in carrying it out, and of extreme bad taste, 
since the treasures were nothing in themselves, everything 
in the associations connected with them. This last 
thought leads up to a short peroration of singular 
beauty and force, in which it is urged that Athens has 
always preferred glory to gold, though Androtion is 
ignorant of the fact; and that the handling of sacred 
things by a man who has led such a life as his is in itself 
an outrage against the traditions of old Athenian piety 
(S$ 76-—78). 

The Androtionea in a moderate compass affords a 
good specimen of the varied excellences of the orator ; 
and it is further interesting as the earliest work of his 
maturity. It exhibits in large measure the “rhetoric fused 
with logic in the white heat of passion” to which later 
critics gave the name of dewvérys, and which they regarded 
as characteristic of Demosthenes beyond all other speakers. 
It has likewise a full share of his faults, which are those 
of Greek oratory in general, unfairness in argument and 
virulence inabuse. In scurrility, indeed, this speech and 
the Timocratea are left far behind by the two great 
speeches against Aeschines, Demosthenes did not, un- 
fortunately, acquire self-respect on this point, or what 
would now be called the feelings of a gentleman, as he 


xxxii _ INTRODUCTION. 


grew older; though his later speeches seem to show a 
growth in that intellectual self-respect which restrains a 
man from uttering the most transparent nonsense for an 
immediate object’. The least attractive feature in the 
present speech is the perpetual straining of unfair points 
against the accused. Androtion was no doubt a corrupt 
and greedy politician, and his acquittal may have proved 
nothing more than that his influence with the people was 
undiminished, that the clique of professional orators? 
stood by one of their own order, and that the friends of 
the outgoing senators mustered strong upon the jury. 
But, more probably, he was acquitted on the merits of his 
case. The principal charge, that relating to the ships, 
was, as has been shown, most likely exaggerated; the 
senate’s previous consent to a vote of compliment to 
itself was a mere matter of form, and in practice had 
almost certainly been omitted; while the two charges, 
one of them of a peculiarly odious nature, on which it 
was sought to prove Androtion disqualified from speaking 
in public, would have been relevant only if backed up by 
legal decisions. In these last, and in the equally irrelevant 
abuse which forms the staple of the speech from § 47 
onward, we may well believe that the orator overshot 
his mark. 

It would, however, be a great mistake to see in 
Demosthenes only the hired speech-writer, the unsuccess- 
ful abettor of Diodorus’ schemes of private vengeance, 
the unscrupulous verdict-getter “abusing the other side” - 
in the consciousness of a bad case. The politician is here 
inseparable from the advocate ; and politics have not yet. 
ceased to be a war in which almost everything is accounted 
fair that promises to damage the enemy. A strongly 


1 See note pp. 155-6, and T. § 85n., § 838 n. 
? ol cuverrnkires pyropes, A. § 37. 


INTRODUCTION. XXXlil 


intrenched system of abuses has to be assailed; threatened 
interests are banded together for mutual support. Demo- 
sthenes is already a reformer aiming at definite objects, 
with a definite ideal before him of what Athens ought to 
be. In striking at Androtion he is striking at “the 
system :” and he does not scrupie to use for his purposes 
the aid of objectionable people who happened for the 
moment to share his likes and dislikes ; to screen himself 
behind vindictive prosecutors like Diodorus and (as it 
would seem on at least one occasion) Apollodorus the son 
of Pasion’; and to play on the weaknesses of Athenian 
juries, 

This commingling of legal and political issues was 
greatly assisted by the fact that, while every full Athenian 
citizen was a legislator, an immense proportion of the 
whole number were also Dicasts, i.e. jurymen and some- 
thing more, determining questions of law as well as of 
fact’. It was, therefore, an everyday occurrence for an 
Athenian to combine in his own person the functions of 
a member of Parliament, a judge and a juror. The 
extreme elasticity (already hinted at) of the ypady rapa- 
vouwv was the expression of this fact. Whatever dis- 


1 The evidence for the genuineness of the First Speech against 
Stephanus is too strong to be resisted: and by far the most proba- 
ble explanation of Demosthenes’ conduct in turning against 
Phormio, a client whom he had formerly defended, and exposing 
himself to the taunt of Aeschines (de F. L. § 165) is that which 
ascribes it to a strong political motive (Blass, p. 32, who is followed 
by Sandys, Introd. to Select Private Orations, pt. ii. p. xlv, and by 
Mahaffy, Gr. Lit. 11. 337). 

2 It is not certain whether any system of rotation was combined 
with the xpos or lot, so as to make every citizen a dicast in his 
turn: if it were so, the turn would come about once in three years, 
allowing for the many public officers who were ineligible, and for 
other causes of exclusion. On the number of Athenian citizens, 
see A. § 35 n. 


XXXIV INTRODUCTION. 


pleased him, a component unit in the Sovereign Demos, 
in any of his three capacities, might be brought under 
the provisions of this law. As a legislator ne expected 
to be relieved from the consequences of his own hasty 
acts: if on reflection he discovered that he had been led 
astray, the proposer of the law must be punished, Demos 
himself was irresponsible. As an interpreter of the law, 
he required it to be intelligible to plain men; to be 
without ambiguities or contradictions. To guard against 
repugnant laws, it was not enough to repeal the old law 
by an enacting clause inserted in the new: the ground 
must first be cleared by the total repeal of the former, a 
proceeding which no doubt made it easier for legislators, 
acting without the guidance of trained lawyers, to judge 
of proposed amendments in the law. Lastly, as a dicast 
he gave his verdict on the proposer of a law, and thus 
implicitly on the law itself, for which in another capacity 
he might himself have voted. We have not yet exhausted 
the curious aspects of the ypad7 tapavopwv. Like other 
despotic sovereigns, the Athenian people claimed a “dis- 
pensing power” of overriding the law upon occasion: and 
their advisers, the professional statesmen or orators, were 
as such the “keepers of the royal conscience,” and liable to 
severe punishment if their master’s conscience subsequently 
reproached him with what he had done at their bidding. 
Thus the Athenians no sooner repented of their judicial 
murder of the six generals after Arginusae, than they 
directed a prosecution of those who had advised it’. 
From another point of view, the sovereignty of Demos 
was so far constitutional that his ministers were liable to 
be turned out by a “vote of want of confidence.” The 
dominant clique of orators might be discredited if one of 
their laws were overthrown; still more, if one of their 


1 évngicavTo...mpoBorrs a’rwv elvar, Xen. Hellen. t. vii. 35. 


INTRODUCTION. — XXXV 


number were punished; and the capital sentence was 
usually demanded’, Thus attacks ostensibly directed 
against measures were really aimed at men; the dicastery 
with its immense numbers was swayed by the passions of 
the assembly ; and verdicts were openly demanded upon 
political grounds. No law was beyond the reach of this 
mode of indictment. However carefully all constitutional 
forms had been observed, it might be assailed on the 
vague charge of ‘‘inexpediency’;” though after the time 
limit® of a year the author of the law could not be 
punished. The ypady aapavopwv lay, therefore, not 
merely against unconstitutional but against bad legislation 
in general; and any law might be pronounced “bad” 
against which a majority, however small, could be obtained 
in a court where the last thing expected of the jurors 
was to leave their politics behind them*. The motives of 
Demosthenes in undertaking these prosecutions thus 
stand in a clear light”. 


1 Such phrases as tpls ovx amrat rePvavac décos occur with un- 
pleasant frequency in these two speeches. 

2 uy éxirjdecov, T. § 33. 3 mpobecula, sc. nuépa. 

4 We thus get the point of Aristophon’s boast (see T. § 11 n.) 
that ke had been impeached rapavéuwy 75 times and invariably 
acquitted. He neither gloried in breaking the law with impunity, 
nor denounced the prosecutions as uniformly frivolous and vexa- 
tious; his meaning is, that he had always been on the winning 
side in politics. 

5 It is in such passages as the following that we see most clearly 
the real Demosthenes behind the mask of advocacy, and already in 
marked opposition to the other orators: A. § 37, ei 5é yevjcera 
TovTo Kal Trwv 7Oddwv Kal cuvecTnKdTwr pyropwr amad\aynoecbe, 
bere, & avdpes ’"AOnvator, ravO’ a mpoojKer yryvipeva, dor’ el undévos 
dddou veka, did Ta’Ta Karaynpioréor, T. § 123,”Azcoy rolvuy Kat 
TouT elmeiv, doov vmels diadepere, & dvdpes Sixacral, weyadoppocivy 
Tov pyTropwv... and so on to the end of $124. Again, in T. § 157 it 
is argued that many public men (zo\ol ridv rodtrevouerwy) will 
stand by Timocrates, not for his sake but for their own. 


XXXVi ~ INTRODUCTION. 


The speech against Androtion has provoked none of 
the destructive criticism which plays so large a part in 
Demosthenic literature. Neither its genuineness, nor, 
with quite insignificant exceptions, its substantial in- 
tegrity, have ever been disputed. The only doubtful 
passages are in § 20, where the suspicion that some 
words have dropt out is as old as Harpocration, but the 
lacuna need not be, as Cobet thinks, an extensive one; 
in § 67, where there is a probable interpolation (but only 
of afew words) from the parallel passage in the Timocratea ; 
and in § 74, where an entire section has almost certainly 
been interpolated from the same source’. 


1 See the notes on each passage. 







\ 


UNIVERSITY 
SA LIFORWY> 
INTRODUCTION 


TO 


Or. XXIV. 
KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 





Tuts speech is so closely connected with the preceding, 
that there is room for some surprise at the traditional 
arrangement by which the two are separated in our 
copies’. We take up the history of Androtion at the 
point where the previous speech leaves it. It must have 
been within a few weeks of his acquittal, some time, there- 
fore, in the autumn of 355, that Androtion, Melanopus, 
and Glauketes were sent as ambassadors to Mausolus, - 
prince of Caria’. The occasion of the embassy, if we may 
trust a statement of the Scholiast which probably rests 


1 Libanius begins his argument with the words Avddwoos pév 
KavTav0a 6 karzyyoros, as if no Aristocratea had come between. 

2 The date of this embassy can be fixed within very narrow 
limits, more precisely than I have given it in the note on T. § 12. 
It was almost certainly after the end of the Social War: and the 
peace was concluded before the close of the archonship of Elpines, 
Ol. 106, 1, not later, that is, than midsummer 355. The decree 
of Androtion, and the subsequent trial, must belong to the firsi 
weeks of the archonship of Callistratus, say July and August; 
and the embassy would doubtless be timed to go and return before 
navigation closed for the winter. The higher limit is indicated by 
A. Schaefer, 1. 330; the lower, the improbability of a winter 
voyage, has not been pointed out before. 


XXXVili INTRODUCTION 


on ancient tradition, was to complain of the intrigues by 
which Mausolus was endeavouring, in the interest of the 
Persian king, to overthrow the democratic governments 
in the islands of Chios, Cos, and Rhodes, so recently at 
war with Athens’, The envoys were despatched on board 
a trireme commanded by Archebius and Lysitheides ’*. 
On their way they fell in with a merchant vessel from 
Naucratis in Egypt, and took her to Athens as a prize 
for adjudication. Egypt was now, as it had been for 
many years, in a state of chronic revolt against Persia’: 
and the Athenians under the stress of the Social War, 
anxious to maintain friendly relations with the Persian 
court, had observed a strict neutrality*, At an earlier 
period they had been actively helping the insurgents. 
The Athenians, whose substitute for an admiralty court 
seems to have been the popular assembly, endorsed this 
piece of sharp practice by condemning the vessel as law- 
ful prize’; on the technical ground, it would seem, that 
as friends of the King they were enemies of his rebellious 
subjects. They might well think the step likely to aid 
their negotiations with Mausolus and, through him, with 
‘Artaxerxes: but apart from this, the state of their ex- 
chequer, now at its lowest ebb, supplied an ever-pre- 


1 Die Nachricht, wenn auch etwas getriibt, scheint auf alter 
Ueberlieferung zu beruhen. A. Schaefer /.c. The words of the 
scholium are xatadovAdcacba air@ (Tw Bacidel) Tas y TavTas Vioous: 
this would be by substituting oligarchies relying on foreign support 
for the popular governments. 

2 On the ouvrpenpapxia or joint command in its various forms 
see Dict. Antiq. s.v. Trierarchia, pp. 1159 b, 1160a, 

3 Reconquered after 60 years of intermittent warfare, B.c, 346-5, 
Grote vu. 172. 

4 The first words of the Second Argument, Ilo\éuou tuvyxdvovros 
A@nvaios mpos Bacidéa, are of no authority,: 

5 See note § 12, dwexerporovncal vuets un pitsa eiva. 


INTRODUCTION. XXXix 


sent motive: and the appeal of the owners was disre- 
garded. . The proceeds, or at least the greater part of 
them, should have come into the treasury: but after some 
considerable time no payment had been made. One of 
the periodical overhaulings of the Athenian finances, by — 
the appointment of a commission of inquiry’, now took 
place on the motion of the aged orator Aristophon: all 
persons were invited to give information against those 
who concealed, or were privy to the concealment of, 
confiscated property and other state debts. Euctemon, 
the late unsuccessful prosecutor of Androtion, now de- — 
nounced Archebius and Lysitheides as not having ac- 
counted for prize-money to the amount of nine and a half 
talents (about £2300). When the matter came before 
the people, the three ambassadors had the grace to admit 
that they, and not the trierarchs, were in possession of 
the money: but as the latter were legally responsible, 
’ it was decreed that payment should be exacted from 
them, and that a dvadixacéa should decide the question of 
liability as between them and the ambassadors. This 
was on the motion of Euctemon, against’ whom Androtion 
and his friends immediately brought a ypady zapavipwv 
but failed to obtain a verdict. Popularity did not count 
for much when a treasury claim, especially a just one, 
was at stake: and on this occasion the ring of orators was 
divided against itself. The elderly defendants were pro- 
bably men of expensive habits, and they did not find it 
convenient to produce the nine and a half talents, Their 
shifts to put off the evil day were at length exhausted. 
In the summer of B.c. 353, after retaining the balance for 
nearly two years, they had only the alternative of imme- 
diate payment or of being adjudged defaulters®. 
1 fyrnral, § 11 n. 


* § 26 n.: Blass, p. 244. Their d¢eldnua or simple indebted- 
ness would be converted into an é¢Ayyua or ‘‘ judgment debt.” 


W. D. o:: 


xi INTRODUCTION. 


Timocrates, the present defendant, now interposed on 
their behalf with the law against which the prosecution 
is directed. Several persons of this name are mentioned 
by Demosthenes. The one now before us is doubtless 
different from the archon of Ol. 104, 1, p.c. 364—3, the 
year of Demosthenes’ suit against his guardians’: but it 
has been proposed to identify him with the Timocrates 
who appears as a witness for Boeotus in the second 
speech (the Dowry), and who is mentioned as of the same 
age with Boeotus himself*. Timocrates was a man of 
mature years and a practised politician, who had 
often before drawn decrees for hire*; but he had still a 
father living, and was clearly much younger than Andro- 
tion*. He was also without Androtion’s influence: he 
had been associated with him in his exaction of arrears® 
and in the melting of the crowns®, but in both capacities 
as a subordinate rather than as a colleague on equal foot- 
ing. His public morality seems to have been such as to 
fit him for the part of jackal to Androtion’: what is said 
against his private character®, as against his master’s, may 
well have been gossip unsupported by evidence. Dirt- 
flinging came as natural to Demosthenes as it did to 
Greek orators in general. 


1 The archon is perhaps the same man with the first husband 
of Onetor’s sister, who afterwards married Aphobus: 1. Onet. 
passim. 

2 Boeot. de Dot. p. 1017, § 28, p. 1026, § 59. A. Schaefer, to 
whom this remark is due, adds very justly that Timocrates must 
have been somewhat older than Boeotus (11. 2, App. p. 218). 
The latter was still a young man at the date of the first speech 
against him, about 350. 5 

3 § 66, mda yap picb0d Kal ypdgdwr kal vbuous elopépwv Grrat. 

4 T. § 200: A. 66 compared with T. 173. 

5 T. § 166. 6 T, § 182. 

7 mpocaywyeds, § 161. 8 §§ 200—203. 


INTRODUCTION. xli 


The decree of Timocrates provided that if any state 
debtor had been sentenced by a court, in pursuance of 
any law or decree, to imprisonment in addition to making 
good the debt, it should be lawful for himself or any one 
else on his behalf to give bail for the specified amount’: 
that he should be allowed till the ninth prytany, the last 
but one of the year, to discharge the debt: that 
if it were still owing, he should be imprisoned and the 
property of his sureties confiscated*. In the first assem- 
bly of the new year, on the 11th of Hecatombaeon, he 
got a confederate named Epicrates to propose that a jury 
of Nomothetae should be summoned for the next day, 
under the pretext that sufficient funds had not been 
voted for the celebration of the Panathenaea with due 
splendour: and on the 12th the bill was smuggled through 
notwithstanding a public holiday for the feast of the 
Kronia, and in defiance, as the prosecution contend, of 
many other provisions against hasty legislation. The 
defendants would thus have secured nearly another year’s 
delay; but the law was immediately impeached by Dio- 
dorus and Euctemon, who on this occasion changed places, 
Diodorus making the first or main speech and again 
having recourse to Demosthenes to write it for him. The 
trial came on, according to A. Schaefer and Blass, about 
the beginning of 352, or within six months of the law of 
Timocrates against which the attack is directed’. 


1 Tt is argued in § 82 that these expressions, 7d -yeypaupévov and 
6 ape, were designed to deprive the treasury of forfeitures for 
overdue payments. 
2 In the explanation of évarn mpuravela § 15n. I have since 
found that I was anticipated by Benseler ; an der neunten Prytanie 
d. i. der vorletzten des Jahres, Hinl. p. 76. The older commenta- 
tors take no notice of the point. 
3 In the archonship of Eudemus or, more correctly, Thudemus, 
Ol, 106, 4. The heading xara Tiwoxpdrovs (not mpos Tiuoxpdrn) and 


d2 


xlii INTRODUCTION. 


Like the former speech, the Timocratea has been reck- 
oned as a masterpiece both by ancient and modern critics. 
The rhetor Theon* in particular notes it as a perfect 
model of the way in which a bad law should be attacked. 
But, however masterly as a forensic argument, it does not 
show to the greatest advantage as a work of literary art. 
We miss something both of the orderly arrangement and 
the finished workmanship of the Androtionea. The 
orator has now a much better case than before; but, on 
the other hand, as chief accuser he is responsible for 
proving the whole case; he can no longer, as in the 
devtepodoyia, select a few points here and there for simple 
and effective treatment. Demosthenes is true to the old- 
fashioned legal maxim of ‘“‘admitting nothing” that comes 
from the other side. There is neither the reality nor (as 
in many modern speeches) the affectation of candour; 
Timocrates is never once right by accident; his law is 
noxious from the first syllable to the last”; there is not a 
single redeeming feature in his private character or in 
that of the associates for whose benefit he introduced this 
law. On each of these points the proof is repeated again 
and again. The intricacy of the speech is a quality which 
it shares with others of the greater speeches; and what 
has been said of these by Prof. Mahaffy is equally appli- 
cable to the Timocratea: “‘Demosthenes’ method of treat- 
ing a large subject at full length was not that of an 


the repeated demands for exemplary punishment show that the 
person of the defendant is attacked, and not merely his law; 
the rpofecuia or time limit of a year had not expired. Hence itis 
quite impossible that the law can have been proposed at the 
Greater Panathenaea of 354: and the note on § 26 might have 
been put more strongly. 

1 Progymn. pp. 150, 166 ed. Walz, quoted by A. Schaefer 
1. 348, 
2 § 70. 


INTRODUCTION. ae 355 


orderly succession of heads. We see from his imperfect 
Meidiana, from his perfect speeches against Aristocrates 
and on the Crown, that his aim was to keep the whole 
subject all the time before his audience, by means of 
rapid turns, ingenious retrogressions and anticipations, 
and constant recapitulations’.” Of itself, therefore, this 
intricacy would be no proof that Demosthenes had 
not given his final touches to the work. It is different, 
however, when we come to the repetition of the long 
passage from the Androtionea, the only instance of the 
kind in the entire Demosthenic collection*®. It is of 
course possible that Demosthenes may have used, simply 
for convenience, material which he had worked up on a 
previous occasion to a high degree of polish. But of all 
the explanations which have been suggested to account 
for his thus repeating himself, the strangest surely is 
that of Lord Brougham, that the Athenians had so 
keen an appreciation of brilliant oratory as an intel- 
lectual treat, that they liked it all the better on a second 
hearing *. Most readers will think the passage, as here 
repeated, too long a digression from the main subject of 
the speech, the prosecution of Timocrates; and this, not- 
withstanding the verbal cleverness with which it has 
been adapted to its new surroundings*. It is not to be 
wondered at, therefore, that others besides Benseler have 
suspected interpolation in this part of the speech. Other 


1 Gr. Lit. 1. 327. 

2 §§ 160—186. For the very different case of the Fourth Phi- 
lippic, see Mahaffy, p. 323. 
' 3 IT am unfortunately unable to recover the reference to this 
passage. 

4 His cleverness has however failed the adapter, whoever he 
was, in T. § 175, a flat and obscure substitution for A. § 68: see 
the note there. 


xliv INTRODUCTION. 


considerations, indicating a want either of (1) uniformity 
of style or (2) unity of treatment in different parts of the 
speech, point to the same conclusion. 

(1) The verbal structure of the Timogratea has been 
examined with great minuteness by Benseler, first in his 
tract de hiatu in Demosthenis orationibus (Freiburg 1848), 
afterwards in the Introduction to his edition (1861). The 
fifty sections §§ 110—159 immediately preceding the 
extracts from the Androtionea, when tested:by Benseler’s 
method, yield some remarkable results. They contain 
no fewer than 100 instances of the sort of hiatus usually 
avoided by Demosthenes, as against 10 in the remainder . 
of the speech’. Hence he assumed that these sections 
could not have been written by Demosthenes: and as he 
also saw, what can hardly be denied, that the transition 
in § 187 is exceedingly ill managed, he came to the con- 
clusion that the entire portion comprised between §§ 110 
and 186 is a huge interpolation’? made up, first, from 
another speech for the same prosecution, possibly that of 
Euctemon, and secondly from that against Androtion 
with slight alteration. But the best critics, A. Schaefer 
and Blass, whose conclusions differ from one another only 
in minor particulars, find in the disputed §§ 110—159 no 
evidence of an inferior hand, but merely the rough work- 
manship of Demosthenes himself*. As has been remarked 
in the note on § 187, scarcely any of the matter of the 


1 Benseler says in the remaining 140 §§, i.e. §§ 1—109 and 
187—218, but excluding from the computation §§ 160—186, mainly 
taken from the Androtionea. 

2 Including also the first words of § 187 kal rept mév rovrov 
Kara oxornv: & dé Tipoxpdrer cuvepe?, moddAa Aéyeww Ere pos Tobros 
éxwv tavcoua. This sentence has difficulties of its own: see the 
note. 

3 It cannot be supposed that either Isocrates or Demosthenes 
could have brought their published speeches within the rules (very 


INTRODUCTION. xlv 


speech, taken section by section, seems unworthy of 
Demosthenes: and we cannot hesitate to prefer this less 
sweeping excision to that of Benscler. It will be ob- 
served, however, that both suppositions are equally fatal 
to the absolute integrity of the speech: i.e. to the notion 
that the MS. can have been handed over by Demo- 
sthenes in its present form to Diodorus, the man who 
was to speak it. And this argument is powerfully re- 
inforced by another consideration than that of style and 
manner, 

(2) The speech unquestionably begins by assuming 
that the ambassadors have not paid the money claimed 
by the State: that the vengeance of Diodorus is to be 
gratified by compelling Androtion, his old enemy, to 
disgorge his plunder, as well as by the repeal of Timo- 
crates’ law, and, if possible, the punishment of its author. 
Nothing inconsistent with this assumption is found all 
through the disputed portions of the speech §§ 110—186; 
the non-payment is distinctly implied in §§ 117—118, 
where the question of imprisonment is argued, not in the 
abstract, but with reference to the liability of Androtion 
and his colleagues. But in §§ 187—189 it is admitted by 
the prosecution that the claim has been satisfied; and 
from thence to the end all that is said is consistent with 
this admission. The first half of the speech, §§ 1—109, 
in general points the same way: the arguments of §§ 17— 
109 are not directed to this particular case: but in the 
introductory §§ 1—16 we find conflicting expressions. 


different in the case of the two men, see § 72 n.) which they had 
respectively laid down for the avoidance of hiatus and unrhythmical 
combinations of syllables, without an immense amount of elabora- 
tion. This polish Isocrates, who had nothing better to do, was 
always ready to give: Demosthenes, the man of affairs, only occa- 
sionally when he prepared a speech for publication, 


xlvi INTRODUCTION. 


The non-payment is at first clearly presupposed’: but 
before we get to the end of the short statement of facts 
in §§ 11—16 the situation is altered’. Hence A. Schaefer 
and Blass have been led to the conclusion that we have 
here two recensions of the speech; that when Demo- 
sthenes first drafted it the state debt was still unpaid; that 
before the trial came on he had to rewrite it owing to 
the ambassadors having refunded*. The repetitions from 
the Androtion, if inserted by Demosthenes at all (a point 
discussed further on), thus clearly belonged to the earlier 
recension only. When the change of plan became neces- 
sary, the first sketch, “full of vigorous sallies against 
Androtion and his colleagues*,” may have been complete 
in substance, but had not yet received the final polishing: 
the hiatus valde deflendi of §§ 110—159 are thus suffi- 


1 § 2 iva...u7...kaTa@cor, subjunctive not optative : § 8 Bovroluny 
5 av...rovrov mabety ay aitos éorw, i.e. Androtion, who can be 
touched in no other way, must be made to pay: §9 Timocrates ray 
iepay wev Xpnuarwv rods Oeods, Tay dclwv 5é riv wow dmrocrepert 
and so below xa@icrnow, both verbs in the prosent (Blass), 

2 Tay wey yap xpaper wav Spaxunv ob karéOnxay vuiv, § 16: where 
see note. . 

3 Benseler, Einl. p. 82, claims for himself the discovery of a 
*‘ foreign element” in the speech, and mentions A, Schaefer and 
Voemel as having followed him, He merely proposed, however, 
the excision of SSF 110—186: the theory of a double recension, 
which accounts much more satisfactorily for the origin of §§ 110— 
159, was first struck out by A. Schaefer, and further proofs sup- 
plied by Blass. If we assume, with A. Schaefer, that the prosecu- 
tion was at first directed quite as much against the ambassadors 
as against Timocrates himself, the motive of Diodorus in under- 
taking it is more clearly explained. But when the debt was paid 
Androtion no longer afforded a mark for the openly proclaimed 
vengeance of Diodorus: Diodoros, des Demosthenes Schiitzling, 
kénntenun seinem Hauptfeinde nicht mehr beikommen, A. Schaefer 
111, 2, 65. 

4 Voll wirksamer Ausfille gegen A. und seine Genossen, 
Schaefer, J. c. 


INTRODUCTION. xlvil 


ciently accounted for. The difference of style corresponds 
exactly with the altered point of view: for it is precisely 
these sections which cannot have been spoken under the 
circumstances of the actual trial, after the debt had been 
discharged. Whether any portion of the speech as finally 
corrected and delivered has been lost in the process, by 
which the two recensions of it were fused into that which 
has come down to us, is not easy to decide. . Benseler, 
thinking only of interpolations by another hand, not of a 
rewriting by Demosthenes himself, imagines that by 
simply bracketing §§ 110—186 (and § 187 down to the 
word zravcopat) he has restored the integrity of the speech. 
And Blass so far agrees with him, that he thinks the 
second recension may have consisted of §§ 1—109 and 
187—218 with not more than a single connecting sen- 
tence now lost’. Schaefer merely expresses an opinion 
that the second recension was shorter than the first, and 
carefully completed in all its parts. 

It can hardly be supposed that this amalgamation? 
was the werk of Demosthenes himself. Our two great 
authorities express themselves somewhat differently, but 
their conclusions are substantially the same. A. Schaefer 
is the more explicit of the two: “either Diodorus put the 
speech in circulation in its present form through hatred to 
Androtion, or some one else took pains to render it as 
complete as possible, so that no part of Demosthenes’ 
sketch might be lost” (ur. 2. 65). Blass reminds us that 
there was a devrepoAoyia to follow, and that thus the 
replies to objections and the epilogue may not seem too 
short; and adds that the entire manuscript of Demosthenes 


1 Bs geniigte zur Ueberleitung zwischen 109 (110) und 187 ein 
Satz des Inhdlts: ich wundre mich, was er zur Vertheidigung 
sagen wird. Blass, p. 249. 

2 Contaminatio as Terence would have called it. 


xviii INTRODUCTION. 


was “edited” (he does not hint by whom) in such a way 
as to give the appearance of unity to the two combined 
recensions (p. 249). Without venturing to dogmatise, 
we may further point out that the editorship of Diodorus . 
seems highly probable on more than one ground, That 
Demosthenes himself should really have employed a 
second time the passages which had been spoken on the 
previous trial seems very unlikely’: and no mere literary 
collector would have had sufficient motive for inserting 
them here. But Diodorus might well wish to give as 
many people as possible the opportunity of reading 
invectives so damaging to Androtion; and the two 
speeches were almost certainly his own property, over 
which the paid logographer could claim no further 
control’, 

As the result of the foregoing discussion, the component 
parts of the Speech may be thus briefly characterised. 
I. §§ 1—109 belong to the second recension: the payment 
of the money is in’ general presupposed, though with 
some inconsistencies (already pointed out) in the first 16 
sections, as though the two different proems had been 
insufficiently welded together*: the diction is polished up 
to the usual smoothness of Demosthenes in his finished 
speeches. 11. §§ 110—159 belong to the first recension. 
Non payment is presupposed throughout: and the style 


1 It is only right to mention, as a point the other way, that 
the parallel section A. 74=T. 182 seems more in its place in the 
latter speech : see the note in A. 

2 The probability that speeches in private suits became the 
property of the client, is noticed both by Prof. Mahaffy Gr. Lit. 1. 
305, and by Prof. Butcher, Demosth. p. 139 n. 

3 The state of these. opening §§ furnishes perhaps the strongest 
reason against attributing the fusion to Demosthenes, The pre- 
sent editor, at least, cannot believe him to have been responsible 
for such slovenly workmanship, 


INTRODUCTION. xlix 


remains comparatively in the rough. 111. §§ 160—186, 
repeated from the Androtionea with slight alterations, 
either belong to the first recension or (more probably) to 
neither: the question of finish does not come in here. 
Iv. §§ 187 to end belong to the second recension: the 
payment is once more presupposed and the diction has 
received its final touches’. 

“ What was the result of the prosecution we are not 
informed. We can scarcely conceive, indeed, that it 
failed altogether, for the arguments of Demosthenes seem 
conclusive as to the illegality and inexpediency of the law 
against which they were directed. But as the demands 
of the State had been previously satisfied by the payment 
of the prize-money, the original subject in dispute, we 
may conjecture, as Demosthenes appears to have expected 
(§ 218), that Timocrates was not severely punished either 
in purse or person’.” Androtion henceforth drops out of 
history : it seems that he quitted Athens not long after- 
wards, retired to Megara, and there wrote his historical 
work, the Atthis, in the enforced leisure of banishment’. 


1 Owing to the complexity and the repetitions of this Speech, 
it has not been thought necessary to give in this place an analysis 
of its contents, as was done in the Introduction to the companion 
speech. The reader who desires to follow the tortuous course of 
the argument is referred to the abstracts prefixed to each paragraph 
of the commentary: they may be read consecutively in order to 
get a general view of its drift. 

2 These sentences are borrowed from Mr Whiston’s Introduc- 
tion. In going over the same ground with a still living English 
editor, I have, I trust, been especially careful in acknowledging 
every note or remark for which I have been indebted to him. 

3 Welches der Erfolg der Sache war wird nicht iiberliefert ; 
doch verliess A. nicht lange darauf, wie es scheint, Athen und zog 
sich nach Megara zuriick, wo er, wie Plut. de exil. c. 14, p. 605C. 
berichtet, in der Musse der Verbannung sein Geschichtswerk nie- 
derschrieb, Westermann ap. Pauly 1. ed. 2, s. v. Androtion. 


l INTRODUCTION. ~~ 


The identity of the historian with the orator is almost 
certain’. The ’A7@is was an historical or rather ‘“anti- 
quarian and annalistic®” account of Attica from the earliest 
times. The number of books of which it consisted is 
uncertain: the twelfth is cited by Harpocration (s.v. “Ap¢i- 
mods) It is not a little remarkable, as bearing on the 
question of identity, that the extant quotations from this 
work just cover the period of Androtion’s political career, 
and a few more years which he may have passed in exile: 
the latest event noticed is the daaj¢iors in the archon- 
ship of Archias, Ol. 108, 3, B.c. 346—5*. If he died 


1 For it are A. Schaefer 1. 351, who replies to the objections of 
C. Miiller and others, the German writers generally (see Schaefer’s 
references), Whiston, and most positively Westermann l. c. Dass 
der Geschichtschreiber A. von dem Redner und Staatsmann verschie- 
den sei...ist schwerlich richtig, says the latter, Against it Ruhn- 
ken, Dindorf in his introductory notes to the Androtionea, 
C. Miiller, Pref. to Fragm. Hist. Graec. 1. p. lxxxiii., and Siebelis, 
whose argument from style is controverted by Miiller himself. 

2 Whiston, after Donaldson, Gr. Lit. 1. 229. 

8 Harpocration s. v. duayygiors : printed by Miiller as fr. 133 of 
Philochorus. The fragments of the ’Aréls are in Miiller 1. p. 371 
— 3877. I have read these fragments, and must demur to the in- 
ference drawn from two of them by Mr Whiston as to the untrust- 
worthiness of Androtion as a writer. In Pausan. vi. 7, the words 
ei 5 roy dvra elev ’Avdporiwy A\éyov must mean “if he is right in 
this particular instance,” and convey no imputation upon his gene- 
ral character. The other case is more palpable. Aelian V. H. 
vil. 6 says: Tatra’ Avdporiwy déyet, el Tw miaros [Vrep THs aypaypa- 
tias kal dmadevolas Opaxwy rexunpiwoat]. The meaning of course 
is, ‘if he is sufficient authority to prove the illiterateness of the 
Thracians :” Mr Whiston’s quotation stops short of the words in 
brackets. To none would the unqualified phrase el rw micrds be 
more applicable than to Aelian himself. That the Thracians were 
unable to read and write he evidently thought a statement so 
startling as to require special attestation ; an opinion more credit- 
able to the general diffusion of ‘‘elementary education” in the 
Graeco-Roman world of his time than to his own good sense. 


INTRODUCTION. li 


before Chaeroneia he may be pronounced JSelix opportuni- 
tate mortis. 





It remains to say a few words as to the view taken, 
in the Introduction and Notes, of the Athenian character 
and, in particular, of that of Demosthenes. <A close 
examination of the workings of Athenian law-courts 
cannot fail to bring into relief some of the weak points of 
the national character: and when I find Demosthenes 
descending to arts of which even the less respectable 
lawyers of the present day would be ashamed, I cannot 
suppress the fact. But I should be sorry to be thought 
wanting in generous appreciation either of Athens or of 
Demosthenes. If it were not that men’s minds, in 
judging of Greek democracy, are under the influence of 
modern political prejudices, no one who had studied the 
condition of mankind at different periods of history could 
doubt that the Athenian community was, on the whole, 
the happiest that ever rested upon a basis of slavery. 
That the free joyous old Greek life attained its climax 
among the fully enfranchised citizens, with their round of 
varied political and intellectual excitements, even the 
least favourable critics admit. That the unenfranchised 
aliens, whether gévor or péroixot, were better treated than 
elsewhere, is shown by the marked preference which they 
displayed for Athens, above all Greek cities, as a place of 
residence and of business. And Athenian slavery, with 
its inevitable dark side, will compare favourably with the 
same institution at Rome, or as practised by Christian 
nations in the New World. While we study, in the 
Orators, the mingled legal and political issues fought out 
in Athenian courts, we do well to remember the very 
late growth of the spirit of justice and humanity iu 


li. .\ INTRODUCTION. 


modern procedure. The rage of faction, and the judicial 
murders in which it sometimes expended itself, were, 
more excusably, no worse at Athens than in the England 
of 200 years ago. The Athenians were to our notions 
strangely indifferent to human life; but their capital 
punishments were far less revolting than those of Europe 
generally one hundred years ago. Their ideas in matters 
of political economy were scarcely more rudimentary 
than some that crop up even in that oasis in a protec- 
tionist desert, the England of to-day’. 

I am even more unwilling to be suspected of injustice 
towards Demosthenes, as I am not carried away by the 
current of recent opinion which in this country has 
turned against him, and has been supported with re- 
markable literary ability. The view which commended 
itself to minds at once so robust and so dispassionate as 
those of Thirlwall and Grote may yet prevail over the 
depreciatory criticism of the Messrs. Simcox and Prof. 
Mahaffy. In the former more especially we seem to 
recognise a readiness to accept any evidence when a great 
reputation is to be ruined, and something too much of 
triumphant iconoclasm*. Because Niebuhr injudiciously 


1 Some comparisons on these and similar points will be found 
in the notes: e.g. T. 76, 125, 127, 140, 212. 

2 Prof. Mahaffy, it is some comfort to observe, does not coun- 
tenance the charges against Demosthenes’ private morals, and 
indeed gives weighty reasons against doing so: p. 851n. The 
Professor, I venture to think, seems to hold and certainly suggests 
to his readers a more favourable estimate in the bulk of his chap- 
ter on Demosthenes than in the sentence or two in which he de- 
clares his adhesion to the views of Messrs Simcox. Having had 
occasion to differ in opinion with Prof. Mahaffy on this one point, 
I gladly express my concurrence with his views on two other ques- 
tions, on both of which he has had to encounter much adverse 
criticism. (i) While fully sharing his admiration for the great 
works of A. Schaefer and Blass, I rejoice that he has raised his 





OF THE 


AAS LIBR ApS 


INTRODUCTION. [17 pe: v ER SITY 


pronounced him ‘almost a saint,” we ar 
denying him the possession of common ts 
sthenes undoubtedly amassed great wealth, 
methods which the morality of his day sanctioned. In 
an age when selfishness was not yet sufficiently recognised 
as a vice, he lived simply and gave away largely. If he 






protest against the scepticism which the former writer carried to an 
extreme, and from which the latter shows only a slight reaction. 
Schaefer had reduced the number of genuine speeches to twenty- 
nine: Blass raises it to thirty-three. I agree with Prof. Mahaffy in 
thinking that ultimately a much larger number will be acknow- 
ledged. If speeches can be proved on internal grounds to be 
earlier than Demosthenes, like the Callippus, or later, like the 
Dionysodorus (a doubtful instance after all), well and good : but I 
hold with Prof. Mahaffy that we are not entitled to reject, on 
grounds of style, and still less of dishonesty in the argument, 
works which commended themselves to the fastidious critical 
‘taste of Dionysius, (ii) In his Social Life in Greece Prof. Mahafty, 
as is well known, places the Greeks on a lower level, especially as 
regards honesty, truthfulness, and public spirit, than is claimed for 
them by more thorough-going admirers. Here also it appears to 
me that he is right. At the last moment while these sheets are 
passing through the press, I observe in the Academy, Oct. 21, 1882 
a review of Herr Schmidt’s work on the Ethics of the Ancient 
Greeks. The reviewer thinks this last and most learned German 
investigator strongly opposed to Prof. Mahaffy’s views: but he 
makes the following admissions, (1) That the Greeks were ‘“ want- 
ing in appreciation of the duty of man to man, as such, and were 
disposed to consider the rules of war applicable to the relations of 
individuals of different families:” (2) that they were not remark- 
able for family affection: (3) he would be glad to hear (Herr 
Schmidt apparently having said nothing) what the Greeks thought 
of commercial dishonesty: (4) Aristotle testifies in his Politics to 
the difficulty in getting magistrates who would face odium by en- 
forcing sentences against their fellow-citizens: (5) Greek practice 
in morals fell a good deal short of Greek theory. I think Prof. 
Mahaffy here gets all that he wants in the way-of concession. No 
one has denied that Plato and Aristotle erected on their several 
bases sufficiently high systems of morality. But a still higher 
_ system may coexist with grave faults in a national character. 


liv INTRODUCTION. 


took the money of Harpalus, a charge which after the 
recent strengthening of the case ‘against him’ we would 
by no means deny, so pure a patriot as Algernon Sidney | 
accepted a pension from Louis XIV. Had the motives 
of Demosthenes throughout his career not been pure in 
the main, he could have had no inducement to place him- 
self in marked opposition to the other orators: he would 
have hunted with the pack, and this notoriously he did 
not do. When the day of trial came, his unpopularity 
and isolation served to point the malice of his enemies. 
As an advocate he was, we have seen, in no respect in 
advance of his time. The courts. and assemblies of 
Athens were no schools of stainless honour, of gentleman- 
like feeling, of scrupulousness in argument, of decent 
reticence in language. On a wide historic retrospect, we 
may place Demosthenes on a level with- the noblest 
patriots of all times. We may believe, without credulity, 
that the author of the Speech on the Crown was as incapable 
of selling his country as Chatham or Peel. But when we 
turn to the forensic side of Attic oratory, we feel how 
much has been gained by modern culture and by Christian 
morality. The true “glory of Themis” has unquestion- 
ably risen higher among the countrymen of a Cockburn 
and a Coleridge, or of a Berryer and a Dufaure, than 
among the countrymen of Themistocles. : 


1 By the discovery of the Hypereides papyri: see Mahaffy 11. 
373 f, 





KATA ANAPOTIONOS> IIAPANOMON. 


AIBANIOT TITOOEXIS. 


, > > / \ ¢ \ \ € 
Avo joav év ’“AOnvats Bovrai, » mev Sinvenns, 7 év 
>] / / / , e / 

Apelw ayo wept Te hover éExovclwy Kal Tpavuatav 

Kat TovovTev Tier Sicalovaa, éErépa é 9) Ta TONTLKA 

mpattovca* arn Oe Kat éviavtov nuelBeTo, éx Trev- 

/ >] al Lal \ \ ¢ / > U 

taxoclwy avopav Tav THY BovAEUTLKHY HALKiaY ayou- 
/ a a 

TwWY cuVLcTapEevyn. vomos Sé HY ériTaTTwY TH BovrH 

/ an , 
TavTyn Toveta Oar Tpinpels Katvas, éav Sé pu) Toontat, 
KodVaV avTnY aitely Tapa Tov SHwou Swpeay. viv 
¢ ‘ 

Toivuy » peev Bovdn Tas Tpunpets ovK €rroincaTo, 

3 / \ / >’ A / / 

Avéportiov 5é yéypadev ev TO Ono Whdiopa otedha- 


vaca, tTnv Bovrnv. 


Argument. Avo...Bovral] The 
distinction between a judicial 
body (dixdgovea) such as the 
Court of Areiopagus, and a 
Council of State (7a modirixd 
mparrovea) like the Senate of 
Five Hundred, was less clearly 
marked in ancient times: hence 
the common term fovdi) is ap- 
plied to both. 

denvexhs] ‘ perpetual,’ because 
its members were elected for 
life; opp. to KAnpwrh Kar’ éviav- 
Tov 


rpavudrer] Dict. Antiq. 8.v. 
Traumatos ek Pronoias Graphé. 


W. Dz 


+ eR , / 
éml TOUT@ TAPAVOLMY KpIVETAL, 


Bovreutixjy jrLxlav] Thirty, 
as for the 7\vacral. See the He- 
liastic Oath, Timoer. § 150. 

érohoaro ... yéypapev] The 
confusion of aorist and perfect 
in late Greek is noticed by Mr 
Paley on the Arguments to the 
speeches mpds Populwrva, p. 906, 
and brép Popuiwvos, p. 943. So 
apoelpnxe below unless we may 
say that Euctemon has opened 
the case and now Diodorus 
‘ follows on the same side’ (é7a- 
yo Sera). 

mapavéuuy] Dict, Antiq. s.v. 
Paranomon Graphé, 


1 


2 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [ARGUMENT. 


lA 9 a , > a ? , \ 
KaTnyopovvtwy avtod dSvo éyOpav, Evetypmovos Kat 
AwoSépov. Kat mpoeipnre pév 6 Evxrnpwv, Sevtepos 
Sé 6 Avddwpos éraywviferat ToUT@ TO Adyo. adi 
Sé of xaTyyopot mpeTov pev ampoBovrevtov eivat 
x f / ‘ r % / > 
TO Whdicpa (vomov ydp KedevovTOS fu TPOTEpOY Ets 
tov Shpov Whdiopa éxdéperv, rplv év TH Bovdy Soxt- 


pacbein, Tov “Avdpotiova mapa TovTev TOY vopov 


> , > a \ ’ ’ \ 
ampoBovnreutov eiceveyKety THY yvopny), SevTepov dé 
€ / > / a t a ' \ 
vrevavTiov éxelv@ TO VOLW TO KEAEVOVTL fut} TroLnoa- 
t \ \ \ t es ‘Ts 
pévny Thy BovAny Tas Tpinpers ju aitety Swpeav’ et 
\ > Cal > »” lal c , \ \ n 
yap aitety ov eats, Sjrov ws ovdé TO Sodvat ouryKe- 
, 
YOpnTat. TovToUS pev eis TO Tpayya Tovs voLous” 
mapéxovtTat O¢ Kal Kata TOD Tpoodiov Svo, TOY THS 
e / | \ a > Xo Led on / } 
éraipnoews Kal Tov TOV opetovT@Y TH Onpociv, Ka 
daci tov Avdpotiava Kata awhorépous atipov eivat* 
Kal yap TeropvedoOat Kai ypéos TaTp@ov oetew 
Th TONEL. 
ETEPA TIIOOESI>. 
Addopot wap *AOnvaiows vrjpyov dpyal, ov ai 
x , 
" wep KAnpwTal, ai Sé yetpoTorntal, ai dé aipetai. Kal 
KAnpoTal péev ai KaTa KAHpov yivopeEevat, OS ai TEV 
Sixactav, yetpotovntal S& ai Kata yeipoToviay Tov 
Onmov yivopevat, WS al TOV OTPAaTHYOY, aipeTal Sé ai 


amrpoBovAevrov] See § 5. 

KeXevorTt...un airetv] A clas- 
sical writer would have said 
amayopevorre un aireiv. 

els 7 Wpayyua...kaTd ToD mpoc- 
wmrov] ‘bearing on the case,’ 
‘against the person’ of Andro- 
tion. 

Second Argument. The re- 
mark of Taylor, that this argu- 
ment is ‘illustre’ (i.e. a chief 
source of our information) on 
the Senate of Five Hundred, 


must not blind us to its many 
defects of style and misstate- 
ments of fact. ’Avridiacrody for 
‘contradistinction,’ vromrimrew 
‘to consist of,’ mpodaBédvros 
‘previous,’ elovévar év TH Ohuw 
for eis rov Snuov, all savour of 
grammarians’ Greek. 

aiperat] There is no real 
difference, as Boeckh and others 
have pointed out, between this 
and xeporovyral. 


588 


ARGUMENT. | ITAPANOMON., © 3 


a a ¢ Cron P's ele i > 
KaTa aipeow, ws al TOV YopHYOv. TovT@V pia HV 
TOV KAnpwTav 7 Bovdy TOY TeEVTAKOTIMV. TMV TeD- 

. A , “ A 
Ttakociwmv é€ elmou“evy Tpos avTiouacToAnY THs €v 
*"Apelw ma elal dé tov’T@y Siadhopat tpels. Kal 
pelo mayg. pat tpeis. 

, \ A / \ , 

TpwTn €oTl TO THY T@V TeVvTaKaciwy Ta Snuoota 
a 5 n \ be > ok / / \ b 
mTpaypata Svoixelv, THY Oe ev Apelo Tayo Ta hoviKa 
f +, 
poovov. et Sé Tis elmrot OTL Kal avTn Snpocia Sidxet, 
/ © 6 / sin 2 
Aéyomev OTt, Hvika peylotn avaykn éyiyveTo, ToTE 
/ / 
peovov wept Snuociwy auvyyeto. Sevtépa Siadopa, 
éTL n ev Tov TeVTaKoTiov ap\Ou@ vVToTinTEL Wpt- 
¢ \ > / ¢ U al , 
oper, 9 S€ dopicT@. Ws yap TWes TOV pnTopev 
4 / n 
Néyoucs, KaT EToS of evvéa ApxovTEs AUTH TpoceTi- 
ain sae s of ea ’ , 9 
Oevto* ws dé tives, OTL of EE pwovov OecpobéTar. Hoav 
\ A , e \ e Pee U 
yap €& OecpobéTar, of Tepl etatpnoews SuKafovtes. 
te / a / 
noav dé Kal dddoe Tpeis, els erwvupos, €E oF Kal 6 
> \ > / ’ / / ¢ \ ¢€ 
éviauTos érm@vupos MvopateTo, SevTEpos 0 Bacinevds, O 
\ a b] “ \ ? A lal / € / 
Ta TOV ophaver Kal aceBeidy SioiKay, TpiTos 6 ToNE- 
¢ al lal 
Papxos, 0 TOV TOAEMLKAY ErrLpENOUpEVOS. of Oé Oe- 
/ / > nr a 
opwoléras éviavTov Movoy ApYoV, TPO THS apxYns Kplwo- 
n / 
Mevot TrEeplt TOV TporAaBovTos Travtos Biov. Kab ei wev 
ae 4 a / > 
evpéOnoav év Tact Sixatot, npyov Tov éviavTov. ita 
\ fal a 
Tadw peta TOV éviavTov Expivovto, ei KAN@S ev avTO 
3 ‘ \ / ” 
npEav’ Kal et dixaiws @POncay apEavtes, Tpoceri- 
~ tal ? lal \ an 
Gevto TH BovAy tav 'ApeoTayitav. Kal did TodTo 


ments here and below, p. 589, 
l. 1. The Soxipacia (xpd rs 
apxns Kpiwouevor) and evOdvar (ei 
kadws ypEav) obviously refer to 
the whole nine. 


as dé rwes, S71] The dre is 
superfluous after ws, but, as 
Schaefer observes, a similar 
laxity or confusion between 
two constructions is not uncom- 


mon eyen in classical writers. 
The name Thesmothetae seems 
to have been sometimes applied 
to all the nine Archons, and 
not merely to the six juniors: 
hence the rather confused state- 


Ta Tov dppaviy Kal dceBerav] 
A mistake as regards the former. 
The Eponymus, and not the 
Basileus, was the guardian of 
orphans and heiresses (érix\7- 
po). Dict. Antig. s.v. Archon. 


1—2 


589 


4 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [Arcument. 


a \ / 
ovy vmrétimtov apiOue. i dé un, eEeBadrrovto. Tpity 
> 3 \ 
diahopa, ott 7 pev Tov Tevtaxoclwv KaT €éviavTov 
Sede © Be tee A Chae Ds 
vedéxeTo, 1) 6€ TOY “ApevoTrayiTav nv adiadoyos* €b 
7 > \ 
Ln yap Tis NmapTe peyarws, ov éEeBarreto. é7red7) 
\ ’ / ¢ lal x lal b] b] / / 
dé ov TpdKertat npiv wept tris ev “Apelw mayo Bov- 
n bl] a a 
js, GAAa Tepl TOV TevTaKociarv, avayKatov pabeiv 
“ A > eS 
nas TOS Hpxev. loréov bri ovK eyydifov ot “AOn- 
a a a a \ ’ ¢ CAA 
vatou TOS pHvas KaTa TOY NALAKOV SpomoV, WS pets, 
3 \ \ \ / \ \ x ¢ \ 
@XXG KaTa TOV GEAHVLAKOY. KATA yap Tov 1ALaKOV 
’ Cor / 
éyes 6 eviauTos nmépas Tplaxoolas éEnKovTa TrévTe, 
tal / / 
gore cupPaiver Eye Tov phva Huépas TpLdKovTa Kal 
/ 
tpitov kal dwdéxatov. Sexaxis yap TpidKovtTa TpLa- 
, 

Koola, dis tpiaxovta éEnkovta’ Rowra wévTe. TO 
, Re NE / . ‘ \ / s : 
Tpitov TaV OddeKa Téccapa’ ovr) pia. SwdéxaTov 

\ fal a , > / \ be \ \ ' 
dé THs pas Svo éoti. Kata bé Tov ceAHVLAKOY Spopmov 
4 
6 €wavTos exer Tpiaxoclias TevTnKOYTa Técoapas, 
lal ¢ / 

@oTe cupPaiver TOV phiva eyew nuépas elkoovevvéa 
nptov. SexaKis yap eixooe dvaxoota, dis elkoot Teaoa- 
paxovta, Sexakis évvéa éevvevnxovta, dis évvéa Se- 

\ \ s Weed: a / v4 ¢/ € an 
KaOKT@, Kal TO tyutcv Tov dwedexa EE. Hore opod 
eivat mépas Tplakoclas TeVTHKOYTA Téccapas, UTrO- 
Neltrec Oat Sé kata Tov HrALaKdv Spopov Huépas evdexa, 
is “AOnvatot kata tptetiav ovvayortes. éroiovy Tov 
éuBoOXLpov pHva TpidKovTAa TpLaV NmEp@V. ExeL your 
6 éviavTis Kata Tov cednviaxov Spopov TpLaKocias 
TEVTNKOVTA Técoapas nuépas. Kai Tas mev 0 nuépas 


dpiu@] i.e. apiOu@ wpicuévw~, equally among the twelve 
W. 


expressed above. As R. months. 

points out, the subject of imé- Tov éuBdrcuov pnva. It is not 
mumtov is of “Apevoraytra, that worth while to correct in detail 
of é&8adXovrTo is ol Oecpodéra, this writer’s statements about 


tplrov Kat dwidéxkatov] The the mode of intercalation. It 
Greek way of expressing ;5;. is enough to refer to Dict. Antiq. 
The five days over and above _ s.y. Calendar (Greek). 
360 are supposed to be divided 


590 


ARGUMENT. ] TIAPANOMON. 5 


> a > U 
éxadovv ot “AOnvaior dpyatpecias’ év als dvapyos 7 
5 \ 6 4 ’ , io of 
Artixy Hv. év Tatas TpoEBaAXovToO TOds ApyovTas. 
, 
NpXOV ovy of TevTAKOGLOL Tas TplaKoclas TevTHKOVTA 
> \ \ a 
npepas. GAN emeld7 Toddol Foav Kal Sucxepas 
v \ U } ix e \ > b¢ / 
nvuoy Ta Tpaypwata, SieiNov EavTovs eis Séxa pepldas 
\ 5 
Kata Tas pvAds, ava TevTnKOVTAa* ToToUTOUS yap 
/ 
éxacTn bud» mpoeBadrEeTO. wate cuvéBawe Tods 
wv a bl 
MEVTHROVTA apyew TOV Gov ava TpLadKovTa TévTE 
e \ ¢ t 
Tuepas. adras yap at Tpraxovra TEVTE pe pat etal 
70 SéxaTov | Hépos Tov éviavTod’ Sexakis yap TpLaKkovTa 
Tpiakoola, TevTaKls Séxa TEevTnKOVTA. Gd’ émreLd)) 
/ € / ee > >. pe ed 
TANLW Ol TWEVTNKOVTA TOAKOL OAV ELS TO APKELY apa, 
\ “ / ey a \ 
oi Séxa Kata KAHpov play nuépay TeV éTTa, opolws 
1 2 ed ” bd \ , m4 \ e n 
66 ExaoTos TOY GAN@Y aTO KANpOU NPXE THV EAUTOU 
a e 
npepav, axpis 00 TANPOOGoW at éExTa nuépat. Kal 
a a 4 
ovvéBawve Tois Gpyovet Tpels 7) apyew. ExacTos dé 
a / na 
dpxov év mid Hwépa exadelto emiotarns. 
\ b \ \ lal n 
poiav pmovnv Apyev; €TrELOn AUTOS Tas KNEls THS aKpo- 
/ \ a 
ToAews E€MLoTEVETO, Kal TaYTa TA YprMaTAa THs 
v7 > > \ > fal / \ a 
iv” ovv un épac04 tupavvidos, dca Todto 
> / a ¢e 
iaréov S Ott of 


dua Th Be 


TOXEWS. 
/ ¢ , > / ) A * BA 

pilav nuépav érroiovy avTov apEat. 
pev wevtnKovTa éxadodvTo mpuTavets, of Se Sdéxa 

/ ¢ be i b) / , \ ees \ 
mpocdpot, 0 O€ eis CTUTTATHS..  pLeTETEOY dé él thy 
UToler ww Tov mporerpevou hoyou. 

*E6os iv THY Bovdsjy TOV TevTAaKociwv rau Bé- 
youcav Ypynuata aro Tov Sywou KaWwds TpinpELs TroL- 


dvapxos] Here too, as Funk- 
haenel puts it, ‘Scholiasta som- 
niat.’ We learn from Harpo- 
cration (s.v. mpuvravela, quoting 
Aristotle) that some of the Pry- 
tanies consisted of 35, others of 
36 days; and Schoemann has 
further proved that the four 
supernumerary days were given 


to the tribes which came last in 
order (Assemblies, p. xvi.). 

plav nuépay trav émra| In 
reality the ten proedri presided 
for seven days, not for one day 
in seven. On this whole sub- 
ject of the Prytany and its divi- 
sions compare Dict. Antiq. s.v. 
Boulé. 


6 KATA ANAPOTIONO® [arcuMeEnt. 


civ. vowos é Av‘ tiv Bovrnv tiv SdEacay TO Sypo 
al a i e 
Kares BeBovreveévas otehavotcba. attn ody 7 501 
\ \ o& ¢ Ld a \ , > n 
BovXr, rept ns Oo Noyos, AaBovoa Ta KYpnpaTa ex TOD 
, \ , ) > / 286 > >’ \ 9 
Snpou Tas Tpinpers ovK errolncer, edoKer S els TA GAG 
mTavra Karas BeBovrevKévar. 6 yodv ’Avdpotiwv 6 
pyTep, Tpootatns @v tavTns THs BovdArs, eyparve 
wydicpa otehavwOjvat tHv Bovdjv. TovTov édd~ 
an U Ud 
Bovto Tod >Wydicpatos ws Tapavowws ypadévTos 
Evxrnpov cal Avddwpos, éyOpol ovtes Tod ’Avdpori- 
wvos. éoTiv ovy 7 aTdols TpaypaTixn é&yypados, 
> / / / ’ al / A x 
erricxetris péAXoVTOS Ypovov, et Sei TOOE TonoaL 7 
> a / n x / eee \ U 
et Set TOde Sodvat 7) wy. Kal érretdy Tpds THY oTdow 
Tov Noyou cupBdrrcTae vpiv TO pabeiy Tas SiKato- 
Noyias, hépe TpeOTov Tas TOV KaTHYyOpwr éLeTAcwpED. 
Ev«tnpwov ovv kal Arddwpos érirauBavovtat Kata 
Tésoapas vomovs Tov Whndicpatos, dv TpOTds éaTuy, 
3 t , \ > / b) a 
ampoBovrevtoyv Whdiowa pn elovevat év TO Sy. 
b] \ \ \ > c od / 
émretdn yap torts Hv o SHwos Kal woANaKIS Trape- 
KpoveTo, [47 vowv et exer EubwAevovcav Kakoupyiar, 
TpOTov tapetéumeto eis Thy BovdAnvy TOV TevTa- 
, \ or > ' > » / ae oY 
Kooiwv, Kal a’Tn ypevva, eb eyes BAABnV Twa 7H 
Kakoupyiay, kal oUTws elonyeTo eis TOV Ohuwov. edeu 
> Lx al > , \ / > \ 
oUy avTOY TpO@Tov EiceveyKxar TO Wyndiopa eis THY 


mpocrarns] ‘A leading man,’ anatomy of rhetoric are not ne- 
R. W. rightly after Schaefer. cessary either to the study or 
9 otdow|] ‘The question the literary enjoyment of the 
(status Quintil. m1. 6.1, quoted Orators. 
by Shilleto on F, L. Argument) el éxe] se. To Yidiopa, with 
turns on matters of fact con- this writer’s usual carelessness 


tained in writings: in the pre- 
sent instance, on the construc- 
tion of certain laws. For the 
different kinds of ordoes Er- 
nesti, Lex. Technol. s.v. Todrns, 
may be consulted: but the tech- 
nicalities of the writers on the 


as to the subjects of his verbs. 
So below époBetro wh Suadavndy 
is ‘Androtion feared lest his 
motion should be opposed:’ a 
late sense of this verb found in 
Dion. Hal. The alteration to 
diapPovndy seems unnecessary. 


ARGUMENT. | TIAPANOMON. 7 


B) SF de > 57) 5 Pes 5s 
BovrAnv. ovK eionveyKe é, érretd7) vewoTti apEaca nv 
/ a 4s Aa. 7 LY 
” Bours, kat éboBeito pn StapGovnOn*: Exactos yap 
a) a / 
Tov mpo avTov Oérex SeiEat Kaxas dpEavTa. SevTEpos 
\ f > a 
vdmos, THY BovdAny THY Toncacay Tas TpLNpELs aiTetY 
, \ ¢ , \ 
Tv SwpEedy. TPITOS VOLS, TOY NTALPHKOTA fy TON- 
a\ v 
tever Oar’ "Avopotiwy dpa, Os nTaipnKer, ovK wdetre 
/ / \ > f- a 
mwodsTeverOat. TéTAapTOS Vvopos, TOV éTopEelhovTAa TO 
x \ eo es / 
Snuool pn wortTeverOat* avd Sé, @ “AvdpoTior, 
a \ 
odeinets * ovK dpa Set oe TrodtTeverOat. eitr@pev Sé 
\ \ an , , ec U > 
Kal tas Tod hevyovtos Sixatodoylas. 6 Toiwuy Av- 
Spotiwv impos Tov mpw@Tov vopov eer aywviterar* 
>] / 
Aéyet yap Ore EOos expatynocev ampoBovrevTov Wygic- 
a \ \ 
pa eioayecOar ev To Syuo. pos Sé tov Sevtepov 
a “4 
avTivomiKkas’ tapadhéper yap Kal avTos Erepov vopov 
‘ a / 
Aéyovta thv Bovrrnv, éav ddEn kada@s BeBovrcvKévat 
a , fa) ‘ \ \ Ui Uy 
év TO Onuw, cTehavotcbat. mpos Sé Tors aAous dvO 
a v ? U 
Tmapaypadixas aywvileTat, Néywv OTL apTLOUK WhErre 
Kpiver@at Trepi ToUTwY. 
\ ? > f a \ f > al 
Twes 8 éreyelpnoay trovtev Tov Aoyov etrretv 
/ \ 
Tpaywatixny Tpos avTiwoplav, Néyovtes OTL “iOov Kai 
“éyrav0a Svo vouot payovtat adANXOIS Ex TrEpL- 
“gTacews, wY 6 eis TapaBéBactat dia TO KUpwOFAVaL 
® Svagwvndy Bekk. Bens. cum libris. 
TiHy wovjcacay...aireiv] In mpds dvrwoulay would imply a 


good Greek the meaning would 
be brought out more clearly by 
moncacay (without ryv) cira 
{tum demum, only when it had 
built ships) aire?v, Or it might 
be expressed as in § 11 of the 
speech. 

mwapaypagixas] By way of 
wapaypag7, demurrer or bill of 
exceptions. 

mpayuarixyy mwpos dvrwoulav] 
The distinction here drawn is 
again not of much real import- 
ance. The (ordots) rpayuatixy 


difficulty arising as to the course 
to be pursued when it is seen 
that two laws are in (real or 
seeming) contradiction to one 
another: the yuévyn avtwoula of 
the text is the difficulty of prov- 
ing the legality of some deed 
which has actually been done. 

éx wepicracews] ‘owing to a 
circumstance,’ i.e. Td 47) Tojo 
Tas Tpijpers, aS Jerome Wolf ex- 
plains it. 

mapaBéBacra] We find ma- 
paBeBacuévos in the pseudo- 


592 


8 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§$ 1,2. 


ce sg ” % \ 4 ee > a a 
Tov ETepov.’ adda éyopev OTL ev TH TpaypaTiKH 
a \ + n 907 / p) \ 

TH Wpos avTivoulav ovdétepos TwapaPaiveTat, adda 

cKoTodmev Trotov Sel mapaBalyvar. e€v O€ TO Ta- 

nA U 

povTe Aoy@ ovyx oUTwS’ O els yap TAY VOLwWY Tapa- 
/ ¢€ / \ \ \ \ / 

BéBactat, 6 Aéyov THY BovrAnyv THY pb») Toljocacay 

Tas Tpinpers pr) aiteiv Swpeay. TovTo dé ovK idiov 

a fal ’ d > \ / 
TpaypatiKHs THS Mpos avtwoplav, adda movys avTs- 
vomlas. 
ff / be é | eer , - / A ® ¢ \ 
otéoy &¢ 81, Hvika SV0 Bat KaTHYOpPOL, DY O pwEV 
/ ¢ A Uy - 

els vewTepos, 6 Sé Etrepos mpeaRuTepos, ovTOS Aap- 

Bavet tiv mpwtoroylay Kata Tiny, BoTep Kal 
i la) e ) , ” \ / ¢ 

évtav0a Oo Evxtnuwv édraBe THv TpwTor\cyiav ws 

\ 
mpecButepos, Kal ele Ta Tpoolwia Kal THY KaTa- 
a ’ ¢ / 

oTacw Kal pépos Tt TOV aydvav. o Sé Alddwpos, 
>] , ny b] \ n / \ / 
isv@Tns @v, éaBev aro tod Anpoabévous Tov Tapovta 

/ \ » / ” oy I ¢€ 
Adyov. Kal Ete Sevteporoyla, Eves dé & TapéduTrev O 


Evetnpov. 





"Orep Evxtnuarv, & avdpes Sixactal, Tadov v7’ 


Demosthenic speech (probably 
by Hegesippus) zept rav mpds 
’"Adé~avdpov cuvOnkwv, p. 214 
§ 12: mwapaBeBdcOa, Thucyd. 1. 
123. The aorist form mrapaBa- 
Ojvac below is quoted from 
Thucyd. 111. 67, tv. 123. 

jvixa Sto doi] It is hardly 
worth while to call attention to 
the omission of dy in such poor 
and late Greek. 

§§ 1—3.. The prosecutor 
Diodorus, following Euctemon 
‘upon the same side,’ is urged 
by a like motive of revenge 
against Androtion, and upon 
even stronger grounds. LEucte- 
mon has been wronged in purse 
and by unmerited dismissal from 
office; but I, Diodorus, by a 


trumped-up charge of parricide, 
which, if sustained, would have 
rendered life intolerable to me. 
This charge, moreover, was not 
brought fairly against me, so as 
to be tried on its merits, but in 
the indirect form of a prosecution 
for impiety against my uncle, 
for having associated with me, 
a parricide forsooth! Andro- 
tion’s attempt failed signally : 
so far from my being acquitted 
by a narrow majority, he did 
not obtain a fifth part of the 
votes, With your help and 
that of other enlightened juries, 
I shall pay him off in his own 
coin on this and on all possible 
future occasions. I shall say no 
more for the present of what is 


593 


NS 


P. 593.] TMAPANOMON. | 9 
? / / / 
Avépotiwvos Kaxos dua TH Te TONE BonOety oieTat 
La e >’ a vad a 
Seiv kal Sixnv virép avtod AaBetv, TovTO Kayo TreLpa- 
n + Sn! v / s / \ \ 
copmat Trovety, €av apa olds Te W. TUMBEBNKE SE TOAXA 
\ / \ 
Kal dewa Kal Tapa tTavtas Tovs vopsous Evxtnpovos 
an ? 
UBpiopévov EXaTTW TADT eivat THY Ewol yeyevnuévav 
? U 7 
5: ’Avdpotiwvos mpaypatav. ovTos pév ye eis yp7- 
> e an / al 
Hata Kal TO Tap vey adikas éxmeceiv émreBov- 
4 \ OQ A , a 
AeVOn’ ewe 5é ovd ay édéEato Tay dvTav avOpaoTov 
’ \ id 
ovdé els; ef TA KatacKevacbévTa Uo To’TOV Tap 
fal / Ul 
Div éemistevOn. aiTiacapevos yap pe & Kal réyeuv 
wn / / \ / / 
av OKYNTELE TIS, EL PL) TVYOL TPOTOMoLOS WY TOUTY, 
f > \ \ fa! 
Tov TaTépa WS aTEKTOVA eyw TOV é“avToOD, Kal KaTa- 
U > / \ > 3 + ia \ b] > -3 \ ‘ 
oKevacas aceBelas ypadny ovK em’ ewe, adr él Tov 


personal to myself: but as to the 
particular question now awaiting 
your verdict, and themany acts of 
the defendant, throughout a long 
political career, which have been 
injurious to the public interest, 
I shall touch briefly on points 
which Euctemon has omitted. 

§ 1. "“Omrep Bixrjuwy—fon- 
Ociv oterat Setv] A blending of 
two modes of expression (1) 
womep olerat Seiv, (2) dep roe? 
olduevos beiv. The ep in dep, 
as R. W. remarks, gives addi- 
tional emphasis=‘just as.’— 
BonOetv ‘ seek justice for.’ 

TO map tudv adixkws éxmecetv] 
The Scholiast Ulpian | renders 
this by exBEBAnrau Ts dpxns Kal 
THS amraiTHTEws TaV elapopwr. 
So Jerome Wolf (a.p. 1572), ‘ ho- 
nore vestro per iniuriam deti- 
cere. Hoc loco non significat 
in exilium eiici.’ This explana- 
tion of the oldest commentators 
has been rightly recalled by A. 
Schaefer and Benseler, in place 
of the traditional ‘driven into 
exile.’ The treatment of Enu- 
ctemon by Androtion is related 


below § 48, where xaradtcas W7- 
gicuart ‘having procured a de- 
cree for his deposition’ (from 
the office of éxAoyevs) is correla- 
tive to éxreceiy here, and where 
there is no mention of banish- 
ment. Nor is it necessary to 
restrict éxmimrev to that sense, 
though of course a very com- 
mon one: it may mean ‘to be 
ejected from property,’ as in 
Pantaen. p. 968 § 6 rns pic Oo- 
cews: or ‘driven from the stage,’ 
as in the scathing sarcasm of 
de Cor, p. 315 § 265 érpirayw- 
vicres, eyo 86’ €Oewpovr" é&é- 
mwimtes, éyw 8 éctpirtov. 

§ 2. Kal Aéyer dv] Kav dé- 
yew, Cobet, Mise. Crit. ip. 520. 
This is one of his Procrustean 
rules, 

kaTacKevdoas doeBelas ypaphv] 
In a bad sense xarack. is more 
frequently applied to persons, 
meaning either (1) to misrepre- 
sent, as in I. Steph. p. 1126 
§ 82, c. Conon, p. 1261 § 14, 
or (2) to suborn false witnesses, 
as ¢, Callicl. p. 1272 § 1, p. 1281 
§ 


10 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [S$ 3, 4. 


rel al , > A > \ , > aa4 
elov gov, yparras aceBeiv éuol cuviovTa ¢is TavTO 
e fal ? / \ 
@$ TETOLNKOTL TADTA, cis ayYava KaTéoTHGEDV, OV Et 
/ / ¢ n / x ’ / > a \ 
ouveRy TOTE ad@vat, Tis av GOALS TEpa ewod TeTOVOds 
Ss id \ , ’ \ x x / x / ] , / 
nV UTO ToUTOU; Tis yap av % Piros 7 Eévos Eig TaVTO 
’ a 
mot €dOeiv nOEAncev enol; tis & av clace TONS 
eas: a , \ \ AL3_. 3957 
mov Tap éauTH yevéoOat Tov TO ToLwodT* acéBnua 
8 ‘al > / > »” ? / > \ / 
3 doxovrTa eipyacBat; ovK Ext ovdemia. eyed Tolvuv 
A \ a 
TavTa méev ov Tapa miKpov ayouvitopevos Tap’ Upiv 
> / > eee D \ a 
aTehuvoapny, AAXN @OoTE TO TELTTOV Epos fn aBeEtv 
a a a - ey a / 
TOUTOV THY Whdwv’ TodTOV dé we Dudv TreLpacopuaL 
a f , 
kal vov Kal Tov GdXov aravta apdyvecbar xpovor. 


594 


Tov Oeidy pov] Certainly not 
to be identified with Euctemon, 
as Reiske and Funkhaenel some- 
what oddly thought. There is 
no mention of dcéBea among 
the charges against Euctemon 
in § 48. 

els ravro ws] Dindorf should 
have followed Bekker and G. H. 
Schaefer in reading ravrdv ws, 
avoiding the hiatus. So below 
TO Toodrov dcé8nua is a better 
correction of the MSS. rooiro 
or 70 Towiro (2) than rovodr’ 
acéBnua. These passages are 
referred to by Cobet Nov. Lect. 
p. 436, who also corrects in the 
present speech § 75 tocodrov 
améxet for rocour’ améyer, in 
Aristocr. p. 656 § 108 rogovrov 
dméyouot, again in Timocr. § 183 
TocovTov améxer. The copyists 
seem to have fancied that the v 
in such words was only admis- 
sible in poetry. 

§ 3. mapa wxpov] This usage 
of rapa is to be distinguished 
from the common phrase zap’ 
éXlvyov =6Xlyou deity, dAlyou, p- 
Kpov, ‘within a little.’ Two pas- 
sages cited by Reiske are exactly 


Tov Towovro Bekk, 


parallel: Aristocr. p. 688 § 205, 
mapa Tpets bev adetoay Wovs 
TO wy Oavary Snueaoar: Timocr. 
§ 138 fiKpou pev dmexrelvare, 
xpnuaruv dé mohh@v avrov dyti- 
Tynwpuevou wap’ dd\tyas Wnhdous 
éryunoare (‘accepted the de- 
fendant’s dyririuynots or counter 
proposal,’ a better reading than 
nTiwoare, ‘inflicted the minor 
penalty of Atimia’). [Add to 
these instances Hyperid. pro 
Euxen. col. 39. 2, xai otros év 
ToUTw T@ Sikacryply mapa dvo 
Wngous dmrépvye.] But in fur- 
ther quoting Or. xvi. p. 217 
§ 22, o map’ éddxucTov éroincev 
avrovs adaipeOjvar dixaiws Tv 
kata Oddatrav yyenoviay, he ob- 
scures the distinction between 
the two idioms, ‘just hitting,’ 
and ‘narrowly missing.’ 

méuntov pépos| With the 
usual consequences: Timocr. § 
7 @pre xiAlas to which would 
be added partial Atimia, viz. 
disqualification from bringing 
a similar charge (of doéBe.a) in 
future, 

duiverba] The Greek view 
of revenge is expressed in Isocr, 


P. 594.] TIAPANOMON. | 11 


A , 7 .. 
Kal Tept wev TOV idlwv Exwv ETL TOANG Aéye Edow 
: a > ee, 4 e 
mept & ov oloete THY Whdhov vuvi Kal TEpt wY OvTOS 
> ae ¢ oan y or 
Snuwoola mwemoNTEvpévos ovK OALya vas EBrarvev, a 
al b] / h id 
pot Tapaditreiy Evxtnuav édoxer, Bédtvov 8 vas 
akovoat, TavTa dicEedOciy ev Bpayéor Treipadcopar. 
¢ \ Ka 
eyo ydp « péev EOpav TWa aTAHY TOUT TeEplL OV 
A , x / 
evyet pos vuds ovcay atoNoylay, ovK av érrotov-' 
JT@v” roe wl bv & 0t6 B 
pny twept avtav” pvelav ovdenliavy. viv 0 oida capas 
vA e ¢ al \ ION / A \ a > a 
OTL OUTOS aTrAOY peVv OvdEe SlKaLoy ovdEeV av eEiTrEetY 
éyo, éEaTratav 8 tyds weipadcetat TAaTTMY Kal 
, / , / 
Tapayov wpos Exacta TOVTwY KaKoUpyous Oyous. 


> airys Z Bens, cum libris praeter r. 


ad Demon. § 26 duws alcypdy 
vouuve Tav é€xOpv vixdoOat tats 
Kaxorouas Kal Trav ditwy 7TTa- 
cba: rats evepyeotas. Comp. 
Demosth. c. Nicostr. p. 1246 
§ 1, with Mr Sandys’ notes on 
both passages. This objection- 
able feature in Athenian liti- 
gation is especially conspicuous 
in the series of speeches de- 
livered (and some probably com- 
posed) by Apollodorus. The 
climax of repulsiveness is reach- 
ed in that against Neaera; the 
speaker demands that a mi- 
serable old woman, the reputed 
wife of his enemy Stephanus, 
shall be sold as a slave in pur- 
suance of a law which forbade 
marriage between an Athenian 
citizen and a foreigner (édy 
dvdpt "A@nvaty tévyn Evvoixy, te- 
mpaicba ravrny). 

Snuoclg] Join with é8dawev, 
not with rerodi:revyévos. Aman 
cannot be said rodireveoOar dig 
or dnuosia. 

§ 4. Plan of the speech: 
conjectural anticipation of A.’s 
line of defence. There will be 
nothing honestor straightforward 


in his reply: he will just try 
to deceive you, men of the jury, 
by dishonest arguments invented 
to meet the various charges. 
For he is an artist in speech, 
having done nothing else during 
his 30 years of public life (§ 66). 

wraTTwv Kal tmapdywr] All 
difficulty is avoided if with 
Reiske we may translate mapd- 
ywv ‘afferens’ and make Néyous 
the object of both verbs. But 
this sense of mapdyew (corre- 
sponding to a well-known use 
of mapépxouar) seems confined 
to persons, e.g. de Cor. p. 285 
§ 170, driyyyervay ol mpurdvers 
Ta Wpoonyye\wéva éavrois Kal 
TOV HKOYTa Tapyyayov (comp. II. 
Aristog. p. 805 § 17): and it 
seems better to supply duds after 
Twapdywv with the meaning most 
frequent in the Orators of ‘de- 
ceiving, leading astray:’ cf. § 34 
gevaxif~ev xal mapdyew. The 
position of rapdywy will then 
be accounted for, as R. W. has 
seen, by its coming in as an 
afterthought. Dobree well com- 
pares Nausim. p. 987 § 9 roiro 
yap mAdrrovew otro Kal mapd- 


ie: KATA ANAPOTIONO® 


[$ 5. 


4 \ 9 a aA 
€ott yap, @ avdpes ’AOnvaio, rexvitns Tod Aéyev, Kal 
, ¢ fa) 
mavta Tov Blov éoxoraKev Eévi® TOUT. UITép OvV TOD 

n > 

fn twapaxpovobértas vuds évaytia pév Tots Oww@po- 
/ a a la) “A 
opévors Tec Onvat Whndicacbat, ddetvar dé TodTOY Ov 
vpiv Today evexa akiov Kodacat, TpocéyeTE TOV 
voov ols épa, tv’ axovcaytes éuod mpos ExacTov 
a e \ , € / ” a... / A 
TOV vTO TovTOV pNnOncopevwv Exn? vrorauBavew a 


bec. 


” \ \ \ bya al y” Ce _-- 
Eote yap els pev Ov oleras TeyviKas Exew avT@ 


¢ éy Bens. cum libris. 


youor, but wished unnecessarily 
to transpose the verbs here, 
mapdywr Kxal mAdrrwy. Cobet, 
Mise. Crit. 1. ¢., brackets xal 
Twapdyev as a dittographia of 
aA\dTTwv. 

écxédaxev évt rovrw] This 
correction of Reiske’s for év 
rovrw is adopted by almost all 
recent editors. It cannot indeed 
be said that cyordfew év rwi 
would be inadmissible: we have 
in Xenophon (Mem. m1. 6. 6 and 
elsewhere) sxoddferv pds Tr, and 
in later authors, cx. émi, or 
apos tive (cf. Liddell and Scott). 
But Dindorf rightly urges the 
much greater appropriateness 
of the simple dative, Lat. vacare 
rei, to ‘devote one’s time’ to 
anything. Benseler, who alone 
defends év rtovrw, thinks the 
expression more contemptuous, 
as if it meant ‘he has wasted 
his time in the pursuit.’ I 
cannot but think this fanciful: 
cxodafew does not imply spend- 
ing time idly or uselessly, and 
no cultivated Athenian, least of 
all Demosthenes, would reckon 
oratory among the ‘studiis ig- 
nobilis oti.’ 

éuwporuévos] There is good 
reason for thinking that the 
true Attic form is éuwmopuévots. 


‘The question of the insertion 
of sigma before the terminations 
of the perfect passive is one 
of great difficulty: occasionally 
verse establishes the true form, 
as in the case of éuvupi—rovuri 
To Tpdyua mwavrddev Evvouduorat, 
Ar. Lysistr. 1007 : éuaporar yap 
Opxos éx OeSv wéyas, Aesch. Agam. 
1284. Buttheuntrustworthiness 
of MSS. is demonstrated by the 
circumstance that as soon as 
the support of metre is with- 
drawn, the sigma appears— 
e0 viv 745’ tore, Leds éumpmoora 
mwarnp [Eurip.] Rhes. 816. In 
Demosth. 505. 29 [Lept. § 159] 
it is only the best manuscript 
(Paris 2) which has retained 
the primitive hand év 7 yéypa- 
mrat kal duapora.’ Rutherford, 
New Phrynichus, p. 97. So 
adnreuévos, EXn\apévos are well 
attested. Cf. Timocr. § 175. 

éxn?’ brokauBavew] Not ‘that 
you may know what to think,’ 
but ‘may be able to give the 
right answer,’ as in §§ 10, 23, 
84. Benseler wavers between 
the two meanings, giving here 
‘zu wissen, was Ihr davon zu 
halten habt,’ and in § 23 ‘dann 
entgegnet ihm nur.’ 

§§ 5—7. Androtion will main- 
tain, in the first place (and this 


p. 595.] TIAPANOMON. 13 


n Ld 
Aoyos wept TOV ampoBovreVTov. vomos éaTi, pycir, 
éav aflws 7 Bovd1) Soxy Bovrcdoas Swpeds, didovac 
\ a \ \ > A ADS ae \ 
Tov Snpov tTHv Swpedy avTH. TavT emnpeTo, dno, 
ee , , ¢ a ” ION 
6 émiatatns, Siexetpotovncey 6 SrHpos, &okev. avdéev 
a , na 
Sei, pycl, mpoBovrevpatos évTad0a* Kata yap vopov 
, et 
hv Ta yeyvopeva, eyo 8 avTd TtovvavTiov oipat, vo- 
plo Sé nab tbyiv ovvddEev, wept TovTwy Ta mpoBov- 
Nevpata éxhépery pmovav Trepl @v KEEVOVTL Oi VoLoL, 
na ,’ \ 
émel ep) av ye fn KEtvTAaL VouoL OvdE ypadhew THD 


argument he thinks an ingenious 
one for his own case) that the 
omission of the Probouleuma is 
not contrary to law in this 
(exceptional) instance. 
says that if the Senate have 
discharged their duties in a 
manner worthy of conypliment, 
_ the people shall give them a 
complimentary reward. Well, 
the chairman put the question ; 
the people voted; it was carried. 
It was according to law, and 
therefore there was no need of 
a Probouleuma. My answer to 
this is, that the rule of sub- 
mitting all resolutions to the 
senate for approval applies to 
lawful, not to unlawful pro- 
positions : for illegal motions are 
not to be made at all: Secondly, 
he will argue that his conduct, 
if not according to law, was at 
least according to precedent. 
The senate hadnever gone through 
the farce of approving beforehand 
a compliment to itself. In reply 
to this, I doubt or rather I deny 
the fact asserted; but even if 
it were true, the question is not 
about the practice, but about the 
law. The law must be enforced; 
a beginning must be made; and 
why not now ? 

§ 5. rod dmpoBov\edrov] Funk- 
haenel cites from Bekker’s Anec- 


The law. 


dota p. 440 the gloss ’Ampofov- 
Aeurov 7d my WpdTepov els Thy 
Bovdyv, adr’ edOds els Tov Shwov 
elcaxbev Widicua. otrw Anpo- 
cbévns. The argument which, 
we must remember, is not An- 
drotion’s own, but put into his 
mouth by the counsel for the 
prosecution merely in order to 
be torn to tatters, with a sneer 
at his fancied admiration of his 
own cleverness (6y olerae Texvt- 
kos éxew arg), appears to be 
founded on the omission of all 
reference to a mpoBotr\evua in 
the letter of the law. To this 
it is of course a sufficient answer 
on the technical point, that the 
sanction of the senate was an 
invariable prerequisite to anv 
motion before the Demos, and 
did not need to be recited in 
drafting a law. 

tadr’ éripero]| The question 
put by the Epistates was whether 
the senate deserved the custo- 
mary reward, not, as G. H. 
Schaefer thought, ‘de argumen- 
to legis.’ 

éxpépeav] ‘That the movers 
(rovs ypddovras) bring up their 
resolutions of the senate:’ hence 
the article before rpoBovAevuara. 

wh Ketvra] ‘do not apply’ 
‘upon a question that is not 
lawfully open,’ K. This must 


595 


14 KATA ANAPOTIONOS 


[S$ 6—8. 


: . x i“ XOX A / , / lal 
6 apynv mpoonKer ovde ev Sytrov. noes Tolvuy Tod- 
TF ke , . \ ’ / \ \ ¢ 
TOV aTacas TOV TpoTrov eiindhévat Tas Bovras, dcat 
ToToT éyovet Tap vuav Swpeav, Kal ovdEMLa Yyerye- 


vinoOat TpoBovAEvpa TWTOTE, 


? \ 2 \ i 
éyo 0 vipat ev ovyxt 


> a \ a 
Neyer avTov adynOevav", wadrov Sé vida cadds" ov 
Ne oe ee: a See tea eee , rye SG ‘ 
nv GX’ et TOUTO TOLODT eoTi TA UadLOTA, O Vdpos Oé 
lA , 
Neyer TavayTia, ovY, OTL TOANAKLS HudpTHTaL SyHTroU 
Y ? ; 
mpotepov, dia Todt éeme~auaptntéov éotl Kal vor, 
% \ > / ‘4 , ¢ ¢ , / \ 
ANNA TOVVAVTLOV APKTEOV, WS O VOMOS KEAEVEL, TA TOL- 


4d 4\709 Bekk. Bens. v. not. 


be the sense; yet the words 
merely imply that the laws are 
silent, not that they prohibit : 
and we should have expected 
a stronger phrase, Reiske saw 
this, and observes; ‘Sententia 
postulat dmayopevovow aut ovK 
éGow oi véuot.’ 

Thy apxnv] *‘ omnino,’ § 32, 

§ 6. oe Tolvvy] Neither 
Kennedy nor Benseler express 
this particle in their transla- 
tions; it is not inferential but co- 
pulative, ‘moreover,’ and serves 
to introduce Androtion’s second 
presumed argument—that from 
custom. Comp. § 8 Ilep roivur... 
This must be pronounced the 
weakest point of the case for 
the prosecution. With the ad- 
vocate’s instinct of ‘admitting 
nothing,’ the orator ‘ thinks, or 
rather is certain’—not venturing 
on an unqualified denial—that 
a statement is untrue which 
must have been within the know- 
ledge of every one of his hearers, 
and which Androtion would not 
have dared to make unless it 
were true. 

Aéyew atrov addjPeaav] Ben- 
seler observes with reason that 
neither Demosth. nor any other 
orator ever says Aéyew dd7jGevay, 


but Adve ryv ddnOevav. The 
reading d\707, retained by Bek- 
ker, Benseler, and Cobet Misc. 
Crit. l.c., is supported by the 
rhetorician Apsines, ed. Spen- 
gel, 1. 372 and 375. ‘Scribe- 
batur 4%’ is Cobet’s remark, 
accounting for the two readings. 

dpxréov ws 6 vdmos Kedever] 
‘* This argument is repeated in 
partly the same words in the 
Aristocratea, p. 653 [§ 98]. It 
is cited with praise by Quintilian, 
v. 14, and Aulus Gellius, x. 19. 
It touches a question which 
frequently arises, both in courts 
of judicature and elsewhere, 
how far and in what manner 
it is right to punish people for 
unlawful or vicious practices, 
which have long been tolerated 
or connived at. It is urged on 
the one hand ‘how hard it 
would be that a man should 
suffer for doing what hun- 
dreds had done before him 
with impunity: to which it 
is replied ‘we must begin with 
some one; it is necessary to 
make an example, else the thing 
will go on for ever,’ and the 
like.” C. R. Kennedy: who fur- 
ther points out that the same 
line of reasoning occurs in Cic. 


p, 595.] 


7 avTa Trove dvaryRa Sey amo cov Tp v. 
Aévye Ws yéyove TOUTO eapuene, GAN ws 


Ket ylyverOas. 


TIAPANOMON. 










— 


Zerst t 


vomovs émpayOn, od dé Todt euiunow, Sia TodT 
atropvyous® av Sixalws, GANA TOAA® padXov aXri- 


oF \ 7 > / 3 t AN > 
TKOLO’ WOTTEp w"P €l TLS EKELV@D TPOonro, ov Tad ovK 


av eypanvas, ovUTws, av ov viv diknv 50s, GAXos ov 


yparres. 


Ilept totvuv rod Sha Tov Svappnonv ovK édvTOS 
é£eivas un) Troincapéevyn TH BovrAn TAs TpLnpEts aiTHaaL 


© dmropevyas Z Bekk. Bens, cum =YOQ. 


Verr. 11. iii. 88 (205 ff.), and in 
the Duke’s speech in Measure 
for Measure, Act 1. sc. 4, The 
‘other side’ might have ap- 
pealed to the obvious rule of 
equity, that when the reins of 
discipline are to be tightened 
some notice should be given. 

§7. dmropdiyas] This is the 
best supported reading: but 
drogev'yors corresponds better 
with dXicKoo following. 

§§ 8—11. Androtion’s third 
assumed argument. He will 
admit that the law expressly 
forbids the senate to ask for 
their reward if they have built 
no ships; but—observe his im- 
pudence—he says it nowhere 
prevents the people from granting 
it. If he gave it at their re- 
quest, he admits he has made 
an illegal motion: but if, omit- 
ting all mention of the ships, he 
proposes to crown them on other 
grounds, he denies that there is 
any illegality in this. To this 
your answer is an easy one, first 
that the Proedri and their chair- 
man the Epistates, in putting the 
question to the people, did what 
was equivalent to asking. Men 
who were not asking, or at least 


expecting something for them- 
selves, should not have put the 
question at all. Besides, the 
conduct of the senate was at 
that very moment being ar- 
raigned, and its members be- 
sought you not to deprive them 
of the usual compliment: which 
again looks very like asking for 
it. Once more, as I will prove to 
you, the very wording of the law 
shows that, when the asking is 
forbidden, the granting is at least 
as strongly prohibited. The mo- 
tive of the law is, that the people 
may not be misled or deceived. 

§ 8. ovK édvros éEetvar] The 
expression savours of tautology, 
but is justified by Funkhaenel 
from c. Neaer. p. 1381 § 106 
kal worepov ovk é€¢ (6 prirwp) 
ylyvecOar ’AOnvaiov éfetvar, and 
p. 1384 § 113 dv ddeaav AdBwor 
Tov éfetva. Add 11. Steph. 
p. 1132 § 12 of ye vouot ara- 
ryopevovor unde vouov e&etvar éx’ 
avdpt Ocivac. As Schweighaeuser 
observes (Lex. Herod. s. v.) the 
correlatives ceXevew and ov« édv 
do not commonly imply au- 
thority to ‘command’ or $ for- 
bid.’ They are often used of 
advice tendered to a superior, 





OF T! 1E 


UNIVERSITY 
LapgRNS 


ov yap él TL ToToTE pr) KATA 


16 KATA ANAPOTIONOS 


[$$ 9—11. 


\ Ps / bd / > b] a \ ’ "A 
Tv Owpeayv, déiov eat aKodoaL THY aTroXoylay Hv 
A / 
momaetat, Kal Oewpnoar THY avaldetav Tod TpdTrov Ov 
ov éyyelper A€yewv. O vOpmos, nol, ovK ea THY BouNHV 
YXE"p yeuv. HOS, PHT, @ T7 1) 
TA \ \ 24 \ , \ ’ 2 
aiticas Thv Swpedv, éav fon ToImontat Tas TpLNnpets 
¢ > a f U \ 
oporoya. Sovvat dé* ovdapod, dyol, kwdvVeEt Tov Shor. 
ah ‘Ba ci¥iapdudl hawt eres oops / y 
éry@ 57) ef® wev dan’ aitovon, Tapa TOV Vosov cipnKa 
a / 
ei O€ fu) TreTroinuat pvelav Trepl TOV veaov ev OO TO 
Rae." \ ‘ 
Wndiomatt, GAN Etep’ atTa réyw Se’ & THY BovdAny 
A \ \ UG v \h ‘ 
orTepave, TAS Tapa Tov vouoy elpnKa; Erte by" pos 
TAaUT ov yareTrov TA Sikaa Vuiv avTELTreEiV, OTL TPO- 
\ e , lel a \ ¢ a 3 
TOV fev Ob TpoedpevovTes THS BovAns Kal oO TAUT 
> / > / ? , \ / 
eriundifav émictatns npwtwv Kal diaxyetpotoviav 
7 a a Xgl € \ 
edidocayv, dT@ Soxet Swpeds akiws 7 BovrAn BeBouvrev- 
L \ of os / ! Re. \ 
Kévat Kal OT@ pn KalTOL TOUS Ye fu) alTobYTAas pNde 
a , lal > 399 al 
AaBeiv akwodvras THY dpynv ovd érepwrdv Tpoah«Ker. 


f §’ Bens. 


and not necessarily accepted, as 
e. g. by a minister to a despotic 
prince, a constitutional states- 
man to the people, or a slave 
to his master, Herod. v. 36, 3 
(Hecataeus to the Milesians) 


pata wev ovK Ea moremov Bacrrét 


Trav Ilepo dv dvaiperOa,..émel Te dé 
ov« mere, devTepa cuveBovXdeve. 
Thucyd, 1. 127, 3 (Pericles to the 
Athenians) ov« ela vmelxew, aN 
els Tov modewov Woua. Thucyd. 1. 
133 (the Argilian slave to Pau- 
sanias), ov« éwvros dpyiferOat, 
‘begging him not to be angry.’ 

Tov tporov} The character of 
Androtion, as inferred from what 
he attempts to urge (d¢ wy éy- 
xepe? Aéyewv): not of the argu- 
ment itself. But below, § 11, 
‘Tov TpdTov Tov vouov is the form 
or wording of the law, a rather 
different sense. The coolness 
of the assumption is increased 
by the presents éyxepe? and 


& § ef Bekk. Bens. 


h §6¢ Z Bekk. cum libris. 


gnol. A. is described as actually 
saying what it is pretended he 
will say. Cobet, in support of 
Dobree’s conjecture é&£ wy, ob- 
serves that é€ and é:a are often 
confounded. Misc. Crit. l.c. 

elpnxa] In the technical sense 
of \éyew, ‘ moved.’ 

§ 9. ol rpoedpevovres—émiord- 
Tys] The functions of the Proe- 
dri and Epistates are explained 
in Dict. Antiqg. s.v. Boulé. 
Compare Schoemann, Antiq. p. 
877; K. F. Hermann, Staats- 
alterth. § 127. Kennedy’s 
‘Committee of Council’ is a 
modernism somewhat too sug- 
gestive of ritualist prosecutions 
and educational minutes. 

unde AaBeiv akiodvras] ‘ expect- 
ing or claiming to receive,’ a 
phrase evidently designed to 
meet the legal quibble that they 
had not asked. The senate, like 
modern waiters, did not ‘ask 


596 


p, 596.] ITAPANOMON. 17 


\ / Ul ” “A M b¢ lal 
IO 7pos TOLVUY TOUTOLS eoTlVY @ ELOLOVU KATHYOPOVYTOS 


It 


a ’ 
THs Bovdns Kab Grav Tiwav, avarnddvtes ot Bov- 
\ a ~ / 
Neutal édéovTo wu chads aperéc Oar THv Swpeay. Kai 
an na a / 
tadta ov map éuovd Set rvOécGar tors dixafovras 
¢ “A ’ , ’ \ U 7 D nr / , 
Upas, GAN avTol maportes tote ev TO SHuw yevomeva. 
¢/ > . \ ial \ \ > a ag? ¢ 
acO bray wev wn bh THY Bovdrnv aiteiv, TAD? vi0- 
r ee \ O\ \ nm +A , \ 
NamwBavere’ OTe Sé ovdSe Tov Shuov €& Sidovar py 
/, ‘ n € / \ nr 3 >] , 
Toimoapevyn' Tas vais 6 vomos, Kal TodT émieiEw. 
al \ a SE > a na » \ 
dia tadra yap, & avdpes “A@nvaios, rovTov exeu Tov 
, , a an \ 
Tpotrov 6 vomos, pr) eEeivar TH PovdrAz bn Toncapévy 
\ \ 
TAS Tpinpets aiThoas THY Swpear, iva nde Treva Onvas 


i ronoapévos Bens. cum ZF Trstv. 


for’ but ‘expected’ the cus- 
tomary ‘tip.’ With less than 
his usual point, K. translates 
‘asked or demanded.’ As 
R. W. remarks, the orator here 
meets one piece of sophistry by 
another. The Proedri and Epis- 
tates were not responsible for 
the questions they put to the 
vote, unless it were that of re- 
habilitating an driuos (Timocr. 
§ 50): the ypagy mrapavopwr did 
not lie against them, but against 
the propounder of the decree. 

§ 10. éorw & Mecdiov Kxarn- 
yopotvros] ‘When Midias and 
some others brought certain 
charges against the senate.’ K’s 
rendering, ‘there were charges 
preferred,’ might mislead the 
student into thinking that éorw 
was the principal verb: of 
course éorwa=éua, ‘some.’ The 
older commentators puzzled 
themselves with the question 
whether the words kali d\\wv 
Twwv were to be joined with 
Mediov or with rns BovdAgjs: but 
it is obvious that the senate 
was the only object of attack. 
The place of cai d\\wy Twor in 
the sentence may be the result 


W. Dz 


of an afterthought: comp. note 
on. § 4, rAaTTwr Kal rapayur. 

dvarndavres]: Not ‘starting 
to their feet,’ as men might do 
on hearing themselves attacked 
without the right of reply, but 
‘springing upon the Bema’ 
when their turn came to speak. 
Timocr. § 13 avamrndynoas ’Av- 
Sporiwy cal I'\avxérns kal Meda- 
vwtros...€Bowy, yyavaxrour, éot- 
dopotyro. Aeschin. Ctes. § 173 
averndnre exit 7d Bhua. cf. Ti- 
march, § 71. 


rovs Otxdfovras vuas] * You 
jurors,’ K. 
§1l. wy é&etvac—rhv dwpedr] 


Cobet in his trenchant way 
brackets these words as a use- 
less repetition from § 8: rotrov 
will then refer, as usual, to what 
goes before (Misc. Crit. p. 520). 
From a literary point of view 
this is an improvement;, but if 
we bear in mind that the speech 
was addressed to a jury, we 
shall be inclined to give Demosth. 
credit for repeating himself 
without verbal tautology. 

tva pndée—érl 7@ Synuw] ‘that 
it may be impossible for the peo- 
ple to be misled or deceived:’ 


2 


18 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [8$ 12, 13. 


und eEararnOnvar yévoair ért Td Shu. ov yap 
@eto Seiv 6 Tels TOV vowov él TH TOV NeyovT@V 
Suvdper TO Tpaypa KaTactioat, adr’ 9D Sikatov nv 
evpely Spa kal cupdépov TO SHuw, voww TeTaxOar. 
Tas Tpinpers ov Terroincat; pH Tolvuy alter TH 
Swpeav. Omov 8 aiteiy ovK éG, Tas ov opddpa ye 
Sovvat K@AVEL } 

"Akvov tolvuv, @ avdpes "A@nvaios, Kaxetvo é&e- 
Tacal, TL Ontote, av TaAXa TavTa 7 Bovd) KAaX@S 
Bovrevon Kal pndels éyn pndev éyxadécat, Tas dé 
TpInpEls py) ToLnonTaL, THY Swpeady ovK ekeoTLW atti 
galt. evpnoeTe yap TOUTO TO iaxupov UIrép TOU Snouv 


mevoOjvat, like dvarewOjva, in 
a bad sense, persuaded against 
their better judgment; ém 7@ 
onum as érl tH Tov eydvTuv 
dvvduer below, ‘in the power of’ 
and so ‘depending upon’ the 
intelligence of the people, the 
ability of the framers of mo- 
tions. 

§§ 12—16. The case of the 
triremes further considered. 
Paramount importance of naval 
supremacy to Athens, It is 
worth while further to inquire 


how it comes that, even if the ° 


senate have performed all their 
other duties creditably and no 
one has any complaint against 
them, still, if they have not built 
ships, it is unlawful to ask for 
their reward. All that is most 
glorious in the history of Athens 
has been achieved at times when 
our navy was in first-rate condi- 
tion; all our greatest reverses 
have arisen from the want of a 
fleet. To take an example of 
the former from old times, it was 
when we had abandoned the city 
and were cooped up in Salamis 
that our immortal naval victory 


delivered not merely ourselves, 
but the other Greeks. And quite 
recently we relieved Euboea in 
three days and forced the Theban 
invaders of the island to surren- 
der. On the other hand, in the 
last fatal years of the Pelopon- 
nesian war, after the disaster in 
Sicily we were not forced to sur- 
render until we had lost our 
fleet at Aegospotami. Nor are 
later instances wanting. You 
remember, in our last war with 
the Lacedaemonians, when it 
was thought that we were not 
prepared to send out an expedi- 
tion, the city was threatened 
with famine. No sooner had 
we put to sea than we obtained 
peace on our own terms. You 
have therefore justly made this 
an indispensable condition of 
the senate receiving its reward. 
Well, in spite of all this, the 
defendant is fully persuaded that 
he has the right to move and 
propose what he pleases, even if 
no new ships have been built. 

§ 12. rotro 7d laxupdv] ‘that 
this stringent enactment is for 
the people’s good,’ K. 


597 


3 


Pp. 597.] TIAPANOMON. 19 


Say 5 \ x , 5 A e > 
keiwevov. omar yap av pndéva avtevtrely ws ody, 


é / -~ / / x a 4 > \ on 
Oca TWTOTE TH TOXNEL Yeyovey ) VUY Eat ayaba 2) 


/ ~ \ 6A lal  ] nA Aa ¥ 
Oarepa, iva pndev eirw pradpor, ex THs TOV Tpinpwv 
\ , \ , / , 
TA “ev KTHTEWS, TA O ATrovalas yéyovev. olov TOANA 
\ v ” , \ \ \ hoo® ’ 
EV ay TIS EXOL A€éyelv Kal TadNala Kal Kala’ & 6 
, , n lal 
ovv Tact PadoT aKkovcal yvwMpima, TOUTO pmév, EL 
, ¢ \ , \ \ al 5 
Bovrcobe, of Ta TpoTUAaLa Kal Tov TrapOEeVvava oiKo- 


| Oopnoarvtes éxeivot Kal TaAXNa ard THv BapBdpov 


e \ , > > i / , > / 
lepa KoopnoayTes, €p ols pirotipmovpeba TravTes €iKo- 
: 7 k n > an @ \ t b] 
Tws, late” Sntov ToUTO akon, OTL THY TOA EKA 
* tore yap Z Bens, cum = ete. 


Oarepa] =Kaxd, by a not un-_ well as of trifling evils. Comp. 


a , 
‘Tay OEOVTwV. 


common euphemism, Funkhae- 
nel compares de Cor. p. 269 
§ 128 xarov 7} un ToovTwy, and 
p. 298 § 212, where ray ws éré- 
pws cuuBdvTwy is the opposite of 
Bentley on Pha- 
laris ch. 1x. (Works, 1. 266 ed. 
Dyce) quotes daluwr érepos from 
Pind. Pyth. v. 62, and Callim. 
Fragm. 91, but thinks the ex- 
pression only poetical: for this 
he is criticised by Valckenaer 
Diatr. p.112, who refers (among 
others) to one of these passages 
in Demosthenes. 

wa pndév elrw pratpov] The 
phrase ¢davpov te Aéyerv usu- 
ally means to say something 
depreciating or disparaging, 
as in Lept. p. 461 § 13 ov« otda 
ovde Aéyw ravpov ouvdéev ovde 
civoda, p. 488 § 102 ovdév yap 
pravpov ép& oé, Mid. p. 581 
§ 208 mepl dy ovdev dv elon 
mpos vuds pravpov éyw. Shilleto 
de F. L. p. 427 § 270=306 
quotes from Photius (p. 650, 
19 ed. Porson) the distinction 
Pravpov uév éoTe TO mLKpOV KaKOP, 
paddov 6¢ ro péya and proceeds 
to show that this distinction is 
not always maintained, since 
gdavpos is used of serious as 


Aristocr. p. 651 § 92, Timocr. 
§§ 127, 158. Here K. rightly 
translates ‘that I may avoid 
words of evil omen.’ 

§ 13. maou. parr’ dKotoa 
yvepyuca] ‘Familiar to all ears.’ 
Comp. de Symmor, p. 189 § 40 
@oTe Kal yrwpiua kal mista adT@ 
T&v amayyedbvrav dxoveweorat. * 
See also Timocr. § 68 rao 
yvwpluws. 

Tovro mwev] Herm. on Viger, 
p. 702 (Schaefer). 

ef BovAecGe] ‘to take this ex- 
ample,’ G. H. Schaefer. The 
phrase ei dé Botd\er is common 
in Plato in a sense approaching . 
the present, but with easily dis- 
tinguishable shades of meaning: 
see the Editor’s note on Protag. 
320 A, 

of Ta mpom’\aa Kal Tov Tap- 
GevGva olkodoujoavres|] The two 
great ornaments of Periclean 
Athens, here ascribed to the 
men of Salamis, are in reality 
later by at least a generation. 
The Parthenon was finished 
B.c. 438: the Propylaea were 
then immediately begun, and 
completed in five years, ending 
about 432, very shortly before 
the Peloponnesian war. 


292 


20 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§$ 14, 15. 


\ a 
movTes Kal KatakneroOevtes eis Larapiva, ex Tov 
Tpinpels Exel TavTa pev TA ohEeTEpA aVTwV Kal THY 
TOW, TH vavpayla viknoayTes, Ecwoav, TOANOY 5é 
Kal peyddov ayabav tois dddols “EXAnot Katéotn- 

A a ite ¢ / * / b] / ral 
cav aitiot, av ovd 6 ypovos THY pvnpny apedécOar 
14 Svvatat. elev’ GAN éxeiva pév apyaia Kal Tadaa. 
GXN &@ mwavres éopdxate, io? Ott mpanyv EvBoetow 
¢ lal n b] / \ U c / 
nuepov tpiav éBonOyjcate kat OnBaiovs vrocmop- 


xarax\esbévres] Cobet, Var. 
Lect. p. 159 lays down the rule 
on the authority of the gram- 
marians that in the oer Attic 
the forms x\jw etc. (perf. pass. 
KéxAnwar Not KéxNerwae or Kéxdet- 
-oat) are alone correct. These 
forms are now completely esta- 
blished in the Tragedians and 
Thucydides, and are beginning 
to be recognised in writers of 
the next generation. Thus Co- 
bet observes that where the best 
or as he would say the least 
bad) MSS. do not give ‘certa 
exempla’ they at least show 
‘manifesta vestigia’ of such 
forms: and Dindorf now cor- 
rects everywhere -7- in Aristo- 
phanes e.g. Av. 1262, Ecclesiaz. 
355, 420. As to Plato, Dr 
Thompson decides for ‘the so- 
called Atticistsagainstthe MSS.’, 
(Preface to Phaedrus, p. viii, and 
note on 251 p). So far as I have 
been able to discover, the vari- 
ants in the text of Demosth. 
show no ‘clear traces’ of the 
older forms; in 1. Aristog. p. 
778 § 28 Bekk. and Dind. read 
Kek\eyuévns (kexAywévns 2), and 
so in 11. Olynth. p. 22 § 16 ke- 
kvewévwv on slight MS. author- 
ity. Cobet would everywhere 
restore xéxAypace for xéxAetar Or 
-eopua invitis libris. 
ov)’ 6 xpdvos] Cobet com- 
pares 1. Aristog. p. 799 § 97 av 


od’ 6 xpdvos THY mv hunv hpdviKer. 
As he observes, the phrase used 
is ovdels xpévos referring to fu- 
ture time [ovdels ypévos é&arelper 
etc.] ovd’ 6 xpévos of the past. 

§ 14. dpxata cal radad] ma- 
Aas follows dpxaios in a more 
or less contemptuous sense, 
‘trite’ or ‘timeworn.’ But in 
Lys. c. Andoc. § 51 xara 7d vé- 
puwov 7d Tahaidv Kal apxatov 
seems to mean ‘the good or 
time-honoured old custom.’ 

G\N & mdvres éopdxare, icf’ 
8rt] Cobet, Nov. Lect. p. 228, 
writes ‘repone a\\& madvtes et 
éopdxare excidit,’ an emendation 
which carries with it more pro- 
bability than many of the critie’s 
ingenious conjectures. The 
construction thus comes out 
more simply and neatly. Re- 
turning to the point in Misc. 
Crit. p. 521, he adds that éopd- 
kare does not fit well with xa 
OnBalovs vmroordvdous dmeréu- 
ware. The form édpaxa, like 
k\qjw for x\elw, rests more on 
the authority of grammatical 
tradition than of extant MSS.; 
but there are indications in the 
latter. See Shilleto’s critical 
notes de F. L. §§ 119, 195, where 
he notices it as Dindorf’s read- 
ing but does not follow suit 
himself. 

mpwnv HiBoeiow yuepav tprdv 
EBonOjcare] mpwénv ‘the other 


15 


P. 597.] IIAPANOMON. 21 


§ ‘ ? f Ad = a a , > A tA 
ous amrevTéurpate. dp ovv tadt émrpatat av oTas 
%es 5 \ rn y ’ 2 , 
oféws, ef wn vais elyete Kawwds év als éBonOncarte ; 
GXX’ ovK av édivacbe. adda TOAAA you Tis av 
lal r / a 
eltrety & TH TOdEL yéyovev ex Tov Tav’Tas KaTEcKEVA- 
al > U 3 = > \ A a / . 
cat Karas ayaba. ciev’ éx Sé Tod KaKxas Toca 
dewva; TA pev TOAAG €dow’ AXX ér) Tod AexedetKod 
/ Lal \ > / a A / > a a 
Toreuov (TaY yap apyalwy ev, 0 wavTes éuod wadXov 
éeriatacGe, vmomvycw) Today Kal Sewav atuyn- 


day’ means here three years 
before, B.c. 353 (Benseler says 
357). This success in Euboea 
was a bright spot in the other- 
wise disastrous Social War: the 
facts are in Grote ch. 86 (vii. 
649—651 ed. 1862). Timotheus 
was commander, but a body of 
mercenaries under Chares con- 
tributed to the Athenian vic- 
tory (c. Aristocr. p. 678 § 178). 
Aeschines (Ctes. § 85) allows 
five days for the landing in Eu- 
boea, thirty days for the sur- 
render of the Thebans and com- 
plete reduction of the island. 
‘Yet it seems,’ Grote adds, ‘not 
clear that the success was so 
easy and rapid as the orators 
are so fond of asserting. How- 
ever, their boast, often after- 
wards repeated, [as e.g. Dem. 
de Cor. p. 259 § 99,] is so far 
well founded, that Athens fully 
accomplished her object, res- 
cued the Euboeans from Thebes, 
and received the testimonial 
of their gratitude in the form of 
a golden wreath dedicated in 
the Athenian Acropolis.’ We 
shall hear more of this and 
other golden wreaths in the 
course of the present speech: 
see especially § 72. For the 
genitive of time 7uepSv rpidy cf. 
Jelf, Synt. § 523, Madvig, Synt. 
§ 66. A good example is Soph. 


Philoct. 821 rdv dvdp tore J- 
mvos ov waxpod xpbvou | eéew. 

§ 15. émi rot AexeXerxov sro- 
Aéuov] ‘That which Thucy- 
dides terms the nineteenth spring 
of the Peloponnesian war, but 
which other historians call the 
beginning of the Dekeleian 
war.’ Grote, ch. 60 init. (v. 
252), referring to Diod. x11, 8, 
The name AexeXerkds médeuos 
occurs de Cor. p. 258 § 96, c. 
Eubul. p. 1304 § 18; cf. Mid. 
p. 562 § 146; Isocr. de Pace 
§ 102. The hollow truce called 
the peace of Nicias now came 
openly to an end, when the La- 
cedaemonians fortified Decelea 
at the suggestion of Alcibiades 
(Thucyd. yr. 18) and continued 
to harass Athens from it (ém- 
recxigew) till the close of the 
war. It was about 14 miles 
north of Athens, on an outlying 
spur of Mount Parnes. At the 
very moment of this invasion, 
the Athenians sent out their 
second great armament under 
Demosthenes to the siege of 
Syracuse, and a smaller squad- 
ron of 30 triremes under Chari- 
cles to annoy the coasts of Pe- 
loponnesus. 

ToAdGv aruxnudtwv] After 
the disaster in Sicily (s.c. 413, 
September) the Athenians in 
spite of revolutions at home 


22 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [S$ 16, 17. 


’ u ‘A aN > ’ ar. rE 
baToVv cvpRayT@V TH TWONEL OV TPOTEPOV TH TOE 


/ \ \ \ > A ’ , 
TapéoTnoav, ply TO vauTiKOY avT@Y amTwreTo. 598 


a \ val \ 

Kat TL Set TA Tadraia éyew; TOV TedevTAioy yap 
f \ 

lore, Tov mpos Aaxedaimoviovs modsuov, OTE pEV 


‘ * aA , 

vads ovK édoxeite atrootetAat SuvnoecOat, Tes SLE- 
Pak t 7 9 <¢ yy 1 > \ 

Kew? 4 Torus. late opoBous dvTas wvious. ézretdy) 


(the Four Hundred, 411) still 
showed a bold front to the coa- 
lition, and won the naval victo- 
ries of Cynossema (411, the last 
important event recorded by 
Thucydides, virr. 104), Cyzicus 
(410), and Arginusae (406). 
Immediately upon the loss of 
the fleet without striking a blow 
at Aegospotami (405), Athens 
was closely invested by Lysan- 
der. 

mapéorncay] ‘were reduced to 
submission.’ There does not 
appear to be another example 
of this sense: but it answers 
exactly to the transitive use of 
TapacTncacba, SO common in 
Thucydides and found also in 
Demosth. (1. Olynth. p. 14 § 18 
“OduvOov rapacrycera), and is 
noticed by the grammarians. 
The gloss wapéornoay: évixnoav 
in Bekk. Anecd. p. 289, 15, 
found also with the addition of 
Anpoobérvns in Etym. M. p. 653, 
1, is corrected évixnOncavy. The 
subject of rapécrncar, as R. W. 
notes, is moNirac implied in 77 
moet, 

tov mpos Aaxedarmoviovs méde- 
pov] Sphodrias, the Spartan 
harmost, made his unjusti- 
fiable attempt to seize the Pei- 
raeus in time of peace, and the 
Spartans, on theidemand of 
Athens, brought him to trial 
for this act of piracy. His con- 
demnation was regarded as cer- 
tain: but he was unexpectedly 


acquitted by the influence of 
Agesilaus, Athens immediately 
allied herself with Thebes and 
declared war against Sparta, ’ 
B.C. 378 (Grote, ch. 77, vir. 89): 
and the whole period down to 
the peace of May 371, just before 
the battle of Leuctra (Grote, 
p. 145) is here included; no re- 
gard being had to the abortive 
peace of 374, broken off. almost 
as soon as it was made (id. 
p. 123). As Benseler observes, 
the Scholiast is wrong in limit- 
ing it to the Corcyraean war of 
373: for the main incident here 
alluded to is the naval victory 
of Chabrias off Naxos, which 
opened the way for the corn- 
ships to reach Athens and avert- 
ed the danger of famine; and 
this belongs to the earlier pe- 
riod of the war (September 376). 
The corn-ships were waiting at 
Geraestus in Euboea, afraid to 
double Cape Sunium while the 
Saronic Gulf was commanded 
by the Lacedaemonian fleet. 
Xen. Hellen. v. iv. 61. 

dpbBovs dvras wvrlovs] 8poBos 
‘vetch,’ of which another form 
is épéB-.Oos ‘chick-pea,’ con- 
tains the same root as Lat. 
ervum, Germ. Erbse. Curtius, 
Etym. p. 346 1. 429 E. T.— 
@viovs does not imply that they 
were ‘dear,’ but simply ‘exposed 
for sale:’ G.H. Schaefer. In or- 
dinary times they were scarcely 
regarded as human food. 


P, 598.] TIAPANOMON. 23 


Ss’ + / Saf ay e , \ 3 , 
ATETTELAATE, ELpNUNS ETUKETE OTTOlas TLVds éBou- 
/ * an 
16 XecHe. Bote Sixaiws, @ avdpes ’AOnvaior, THAULKAav- 
al \ 2 / al 
THY EXOVT@Y poTHY ep EXATEPA TAV TpLNpwV, TOUTOY 
/ Aa fal / >] ’ an n 
opov TeVelkate TH BovrAy, TOTEP avTHV Sel NaBeiv THY 
\ x bd ¢ f. a 
Swpeay 7 ov. eb yap TavTa TadXa SioiKnoele’ KANGS, 
} a de \ 3 3 a aes / \ an 
uv ov dé TO T €E apyns TadT extTncayucla Kal vov 
: 4 | 
oolomev, TaVTAS MN ToLnTaLTO, Tas TpinpeEts AEyO, 
O\ > / 4 - \ \ ie vA U 
ovdev éxelvav Operos’ THY yap THY OXNWY GwTNHpPLAV 
al , nw 
Tp@Tov vTapyew Oel TapecKevacuévnvy TO Sue. 
® / > a) ’ n / a \ 
oUTos Toivuy Els TOUT EAHNAVOE TOD vowiCeLy a’T@ Kab 
héyeww Kal ypadew éEeivar wav 6 Te av BovrnTaL, 
or / \ vw A Ul ¢ a 
@ote PeBovrAevKvias ev TAA OV TpoTTOV VES 
2 / a a ] 
axovete THS Bovdys, ov TeTroinmévns Oé Tas TPINpELS, 
yéypade Sodvar Thy Swpedr. 
XN nr \ ¢e > \ \ , b] 4 vw 2 
17 Kal tadta pév ws ov Tapa Tov vouov éoTiv, ovT 
' Stocxyjoerc Bens, cum ZTOkKrs. 


§ 16. 8pov redelkatre] So Spot 
tov ayabdv Kal xavdves, ‘tests 
and standards of everything 
good,’ de Cor. p. 324 § 296. A 
slightly different sense in Mid. 
p. 548 § 105 &va épov Oéuevos 
mavtTi tTpdr@ me avedecv, ‘ having 
but one object in view’, =7é)os. 

Tas Tpinpers Néyw] Cobet again 
brackets, Misc. Crit. p. 521. He 
will not hear of statements being 
brought down to the level of the 
meanest capacity: cf. § 11. 

mapeckevacméevnv TH Snuw] ‘se- 
cured for the people’ K. d 
similarly Benseler’s version. 

els Todr’ éAndAvde Tod voulfew]) 
The genitive after els roiro is 
much more commonly a sub- 
stantive than a verb; we say eis 
TovTo pavias, To\uns, avawxur- 
tias. A parallel instance is how- 


ever quoted from Plato, Meno . 


84 a, ’Evvoe?s al, & Mévwr, od 
Eat 75n Badifwr b5e Tod dvamt- 


pynoxecOa, ‘what advances he 
has made in his power of. recol« 
lection.’ 

BeBouvXevxvias] as in §§ 5, 9, 
‘discharged its functions,’ 

§§ 17—20. Anticipation of 
the defence that the senate was 
not responsible for the defalca- 
tions of its subordinate officer. 
I hear however that the defendant 
will urge that the senate is not 
to blame, but that the treasurer 
of the shipbuilders ran away with 
two talents and a half, and the 
thing has beena misfortune. To 
this I reply, first, that it is not 
usual to reward misfortunes: and 
further, that he is advancing two 
pieas which are mutually incon- 
sistent. Androtionis on the horns 
of adilemma. If the reward has 
not been given contrary to law, 
what need is there of an excuse ? 
By urging an excuse for the sen- 
ate, he in effect admits that the 


24 


KATA ANAPOTIONO® 


[$ 18. 


av ovtos éyou Aéyetv OVP pels mevobeinr av™ 
dxovw & avrov Ttowodtov épely tiva év vuiv doyor, 
@s ovx 7 Bovdr) yéyover aitia Tod pn TweToncOas 
Tas vavs, GX 6 TdY TpLNpOTTOLMOY Tapias drodpas 
@xeTO Exwv TéevP ruiTddavTa, Kal TO TPaypa aTv- 


m dv om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum =YTOQr. 


law has been broken. But on 
grounds of public policy it is 
your duty to admit no excuses. 
If you once begin a system of 
admitting excuses, you will get 
nothing done. Once more, I will 
prove to you that the senate is 
responsible for the failure to 
build ships, for the defaulting 
treasurer was the man of its own 
choice. IPf it made a bad choice 
it must take the consequences. 

§ 17. 6 7av rpinporady rautas] 
Little is known of the rpinpo- 
mo.ol, who indeed appear not to 
be mentioned elsewhere. It 
may be inferred, however, from 
the fact that the senate was 
responsible for the prescribed 
annual addition to the fleet, 
that they were appointed by it, 
either as a committee of the 
Bouleutae themselves, or as a 
subordinate body (Boeckh, P. E. 
p. 249: Dict. Antiq.s. v. ‘navis,’ 
sub init.). Welearn from Aeschin. 
Timarch. § 111, that the senate 
might justly be deprived of its 
dwped (the honorary reward here 
in question) owing to the mis- 
conduct of any of its members, 
since it had the power to get rid 
of them by the mode of expul- 
sion termed éx@vAdodopia. In 
another passage of the same 
orator, the rpinporo.ol appear to 
be classed with the retxozouol as 
an dpx7 alpern, and as charged 
with distributing the building 
of the ships among the ten tribes 
Ctesiph. § 30 éreddy 5 adédy Tis 


‘olerat del. 


Tovs Urd Tod Syuov Kexetpororn- 
Bévous Kal Tods KAnpwrods dpxov- 
Tas, KaTaNelrerat, ovs al pudal 
kal at tpirrves kal of Snuor eg 
éavrwv aipotyra Ta Snubova xp7- 
para Suaxelpeferv, 7 TovTous aiperovs 
apxovras elvat, | TouTo 5é yiyverat, 
bray, woTep vov, émiTaxOn Te 
Tats pudais, o Tag¢povs éSepyd- 
feoOa. 4 Tpinpers vavanyet- 
oOa. If this passage stood 
alone, we should certainly infer 
that the zpenporool were chosen 
by the tribes; but the clearly 
proved responsibility of the 
senate in the matter seems to 
prove the contrary. They may 
have been ten in number, one 
for each tribe : and either chose 
their own treasurer or had one 
chosen for them by the senate, 
whose responsibility for its 
delegated authority was thus 
maintained, The information 
in Boeckh and in K. F. Her- 
mann (Staatsalterth. §§ 126, 
161) is extremely meagre, and 
the above is offered as an at- 
tempt at explanation, taking the 
few known facts into account. 
On the Athenian State Treasurer 
and the various subordinate 
collectors of revenues, see Publ. 
Econ. book 11. ch. vi. 

@xeTo] Equivalent to airios 
av bs @xeTO, a condensed expres- 
sion like the opening words of 
the speech, édrep Evxrjuwy... 
Funkhaenel com- 
pares Mid. p. 584 § 218 ov yap 
€x modtrikys airlas, ovd’ womep 


18 


Pp. 599.] 


Xnwa cULBEBKeED. 


ITAPANOMON. 


25 


> \ be a \ b] a 
éyo O€ mpetov pev avo TodTo 


/ > a na 
Oavpafo, et otehavodv emi tots nrvynpévors HElov 
Thy Bovdnv' TOV KaTopOovpLEévwY yap eywrye Aro unV 
épywv tas tovavtas wpicbat Timds' erevta Se" Kd- 


Ketvo étt BovrAomar ppdoat mpos vpas. 
Sixatov elvat wept apudoiv 


ov dnt 
, e > \ \ 
Aeyelv, WS OV Tapa TOY 


2 6é 0m. Bens. 


’"Apioropwv amodods robs orepd- 
vous é\vce THY TpoBornv, adr’ é& 
UBpews...kplverac and Aristocr. 
p. 688 § 203. For examples 
from Plato, see the Editor’s note 
(after Heindorf) on Protag. 341 a. 
mwévd’ nutrddavra] ‘Two and 
a half talents,’ as K. has rightly 
given it in his Argument to this 
speech: but in his text he trans- 
lates ‘four and a half,’ which 
would be wéumrov 7utrddavTov. 
Curiously enough, he has made 
the same slip in pro Phorm. p. 
956 § 38, as is there pointed out 
by Mr Sandys. In so distin- 
guisheda scholar such oversights 
are but an indication of the 
haste with which he worked. 
éml rots nruxnuévors]| ‘for mis- 
fortune’ K., R. W. ‘for this 
failure’ Dobree, which at least 
does more justice to the article. 
So Benseler, ‘seines Missge- 
schicks halber.’ I hardly think 
that Androtion is ironically re- 
presented as votingacrown tothe 
senate for (i.e. because of) their 
misfortune ; and prefer to render 
‘after such a fiasco,’ or ‘when 
they had made such a mess of 
it.’ In other words, émi expresses 
here sequence in time rather 
than causality: but in § 69 émi 
Tovros...reOvdvat the causal no- 
tion is more prominent. Paley 
on Aesch. Pers. 527 éricrayac 
bev ws em’ é&eipyacuévois observes : 
‘In this expression émi does not 


so much signify after or conse- 
quent upon, as on or with, i.e. it 
refers to the state of affairs at 
the time of the action.’ It would 
be safer, I think, to say that ézf 
may also mean ‘on’ or ‘with.’ 
Demosth. 1. Steph. p. 1126 § 81 
Mr Paley himself translates 7e- 
Ovdvat én’ eipyacpuévas ‘[to be put 
to death] for what youhave done.’ 
éreita 6¢ Kaxeivo ért] The 
grammars lay down the rule 
that mparov pév is usually fol- 
lowed by éze:ra without dé. I 
notice Benseler’s reading ézecra 
kaxetv’ &ru for the sake of the 
curious statistics he has collect- 
ed: ‘Out of 97 places in De- 
mosthenes where érera follows 
mporov pev Or mpwrov, there is 
only one (Callicles p. 1278 § 22) 
where all mss. insert 5é¢ after 
ére:ra, and only two (the present 
passage and Phaenipp. p. 1041 
§ 9) where it is found in cod. r.’ 
§ 18. wept dudoty] Andro- 
tion is made to plead at once 
‘no excuse needed’ (because 
the law has not been broken) 
and ‘a good excuse’ (because 
the senate in their collective 
capacity were not to blame). 
The prosecution contends that 
he must take his choice between 
the two lines of defence. In 
English law it is no uncommon 
thing to see'a claim for debt 
resisted by pleas both of ‘ pay- 
ment’ and ‘ never indebted.’ 


599 


26 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§§ 19, 20. 


, £ 
vopsov 7 Swpea Sédorat, Kal ws ov did THY Bourn 
e / 
ovK éioly al Tpinpers. ef pev yap Sidovar Kab pr} 
TOLNTAMEVH TPOTHKEL, TL TOOTO Set Aéyeuy, Os SvTWa 
, > / > > > ” / a 
Snmote ov metoinvras; ef 8 ovK« eEeat, Ti paddov, 
av Sia tov Selva H Tov Seiva émideiEn ju1) TeTroLN- 
aT 3} 0 ” 
lal \ 
19 pévas, éxelvn mpoonKke RAaBelv; yopis Sé TovTwY 
n al a / 
Euouye Soxovow aipecw vpiv of TovodToL Adyou 6150- 
U ’ »” a! / \ / > / 
vat, ToTep olecOe Seiv Tpohaces Kal Noyous axovetv 
~ a n lal \ 
TOV GdLKOUYT@Y Uuds 7) vads KexTHTOaL. et wey yap 
, Vp de / ” an ¢ / an 
TovTou TavT aTrodéEeaOe, éotat SHAov atracais Tals 
a / a U \ b] a \ 
Bovrais ore Se? mpodhacw milavnyv éEevpeiv mpods 
Uuds, ovxt Tpinpes Toicacbar’ éx dSé TovToV Ta 
bev Ypnpata avarwOnoerat, vads 5é ovy E€ere vpeis. 
, 9," > ¢ ¢ / / \ al ‘ ’ / 

20 €av ©, ws 0 vomos Aéyer Kal Se? Tos dumpmoxKoTas, 
tal \ ¢ “ \ 4 t BRU 
TiKPWS Kab aTAMS TAS pev TMpohagers averANTE, 

al ? / \ \ d/ \ a - 

gavite dé adypnuévot Tnv Swpedy Ott Tas vads ov 
3 a 

TeTOMVTal, TaVvTes, © avopes “AOnvaiot, TeTounpévas 

Upiv Tapadwcovet Tas TpLNnpELs, TaVTAa Tara Tap’ 


el 8 otk err] ‘If (as is the 
fact) itis not lawful, why should 
the senate have received its re- 
ward any the more, because An- 
drotion can show that it was 
owing to this or that person 
that ships were never built?’ 
ef ov does not merely present the 
alternative, as ef un would have 
done, but inclines the balance 
towards it. The phrase recurs 
in Timocr. § 53. For rpocfjxe, 
the force of which is preserved 
in the version above, there is 
an ill-supported variant smpoc- 
nKet, an easier reading doubt- 
less due to a ‘corrector.’ Cf. 
§ 23, rpocnkev émayyéANew njyiv. 

§19. From the legal question 
the speaker now turns to. the 
public interest, which will be 
best served by a general rule that 


no excuses are to be admitted. 

Tovrov tTadr damodésecbe] ‘if 
you are going to stand this 
from the defendant.’ dodéye- 
c0a, to accept (1) a statement, 
and so to ‘allow’ a man to 
make it (2) an opinion, and so 
to ‘agree.’ The latter is the 
almost constant sense in Plato: 
see on Protag. 324 c. 337 «. 
Usually with the gen. of the 
person only: the ace, is added, 
as here, in 1. Aphob. p. 832 § 59, 
mos dmodéfacbal te mpoonke 
TOUTUW EYOVT WY ; 

§ 20. mxpds cal dards] ‘you 
proceed sternly and strictly to 
overrule excuses and letit beseen 
that you have withheld the re- 
ward.’ K. ams implies ‘ stand- 
ing no nonsense:’ ‘schlechtweg,’ 
Benseler; ‘absolutely,’ R. W. 


p. 599.] 


TIAPANOMON. 27 


n ’ 
vpiv éopaxotes acOevéctepa Tod vduou yeyevnpéva. 
ef / 209 ” wv > be we / b] \ 
OTL’ Tolvuy ovd altios adXos ovdels avOpadtTav éott 

fal a \ a fa) a a 
TOD pn weToinoclat Tas vais, TodTO cadas vpiv 
> / - 3 Le) \ ¢ \ \ / a 
émudelEm’ avedhovoa yap 1 BovAy Tov vouov TovTOV 


¢ / 
EYELPOTOVNTEV AUTHD®. 


© at’r7y Z Bens. cum FTA. 


dvedotca yap  Bovj] The 
difficulty of this passage was 
felt in ancient times, Harpo- 
cration and the writer in Bekk. 
Anecd. p. 397 both notice the 
various readings airy and ad- 
thv, the former further sus- 
pecting that some words have 
been lost (dcapas & av’rod éxov- 
Tos Kal éANeuras, dANot GANwS 
é&nyotvra). The Scholiast Ul- 
pian also points out that rodrov 
may be joined with rdv véuor, 
or taken separately; and ex- 
plains éyecpordyynce by éorepd- 
vwoe. We are thus led to two 
main lines of interpretation. G. 
H. Schaefer, reading avrhy, ex- 
plains as follows: ‘ The senate, 
when it set aside this law (that 
the crown was dependent on 
its having built ships as well 
as discharged other duties) voted 
itself guilty. Its conduct was 
a proof, as the speaker says 
just before, that it was alrios 
TOO wy TwemonoOa Tas vads, for 
otherwise it would have laid 
the blame upon the really guilty 
person (the treasurer). This is, 
in the main, the view of Funk- 
haenel, of Martin Mohr in a 
programme (Colon. 1845) spe- 
cially devoted to this passage, 
of Dindorf, and of Kennedy in 
his translation and notes: and 
they mostly agree in Schaefer’s 
suggestion to read a’ri avriy. 
But xecporoveiv can hardly mean 
either to vote itself guilty or 
to vote itself the crown, as the 


Scholiast took it: and there is 
something forced in the whole 
sense of the passage thus under- 
stood, hardly in keeping with 
cagws émrideiEw. The other ex-: 
planation adopts the reading 
airy, for which there is good 
MS. authority, and separates 
tovrov from roy véuov. Ben- 
seler, partly following some of 
the older commentators, trans- 
lates thus: ‘The senate (council), 
which made the law null and 
void, chose this man (the trea- 
surer) for itself.’ In other words, 
‘I will prove to you the respon- 
sibility of the senate: for this 
very senate which acted thus 
illegally had (previously) chosen 
the defaulter for its treasurer 
(and so was liable for his mal- 
versation).’ This at least pre- 
serves the usual meaning of 
xXetporovety, and is certainly pre- 
ferable to the alternative ren- 
dering, though not, I think, free 
from difficulty: the proper Greek 
for ‘Der Rath, der das Gesetz 
null und nichtig machte ’ (Ben- 
seler’s version), would be 7 
Bovd} 7 dvedodca Tov véuov. The 
Scholiast and Jerome Wolf ex- 
plained rodrov éxe.pordyncev av- 
7H ‘chose Androtion for its 
champion:’ Jurinus was the 
first to refer rovrov to the trea- 
surer. The Zurich editors, in 
deserting their favourite 2, 
appear to have interpreted the 
passage in much the same way 
as Benseler; Kennedy and Whis- 


21 


28 


KATA ANAPOTIONO® 


[$$ 21, 22. 


v / ? a , \ a a id / 
Ere toivuv émiyepel NEyev Tepl Tod THs éTaLpy- 
, ¢ e / ¢ n % , + Sa 
Tews vouov, ws VBpifouev nueis Kal BYachnpwias ovyl 
Tpoonkovcas Kat avTod TowovpcOa. Kai pyoi Sety 
n n_3 be a \ 
Huds, elmep éemictevouev eivat TavT adnOH, Tpos 
n Lal “\ nr 
tovs Oecpobéras arava, tv’ éxet Tepl yiduav éexw- 
na 9 , lal 
Suvevomev, eb KaTaevdopevoe TadT epawopeOa’ viv 


ton both think it corrupt: as 
does Cobet, Misc. Crit. p. 522, 
who suspects an extensive la- 
cuna. 

§§ 21—24. Androtion’s ex- 
pected defence to the charge of 
profligacy. He will say that all 
this is mere insult and calumny : 
that if we believed in the truth 
of the charges we ought to have 
raised the question directly by 
an impeachment for immorality, 
so as to risk athousand drachmas 
in case we were proved to be 
false accusers. We reply on 
both points: first, we do not 
merely accuse, we are prepared 
to prove. Proof must in some 
cases rest upon circumstantial 
evidence, or upon probabilities, 
not on ocular demonstration, but 
ours is not one of these cases; 
we have a witness furnished with 
documentary evidence and who 
has made himself responsible for 
his testimony. And secondly, 
we mean to bring such an im- 
peachment in due course; but 
we are within our rights in now 
referring to the law. For the 
question is predominantly one of 
illegality: and we show, with 
perfect propriety, that you have 
not only moved an unlawful 
decree, but led an unlawful life. 

§ 21. Tov rns ératpjoews vd- 
pov] As Androtion was un- 
doubtedly acquitted (Timocr. § 
8), we may hope that this odious 
charge was without foundation. 


Aeschines procured the con- 
demnation of Timarchus on a 
ypapyn éraipnoews, and so ‘ put 
out of the way’ (dvyjpnKe, De- 
mosth. F. L. § 2) one of his 
principal accusers in the matter 
of the Embassy. The substance 
of the law is given in Timarch. 
§§ 19, 20, and what professes 
to be the text of it, really com- 
piled from the two preceding 
sections, in § 21. As regards 
the penalty, the orator’s vague 
expression ra péyiora émitima 
éréOnxev is there particularised 
into Oavary fnmotcOw. That 
such cases belonged to the ju- 
risdiction of the Thesmothetae 
we know only from the present 
passage. It is to be observed 
that the action didnot lieagainst 
theimmorality itself, but against 
the exercise of public functions, 
political or religious, by those 
who had been guilty of it. Cf. 
Dict. Antig. s. Vv. Hetaireseos 
Graphé. 

wW’ éxe? aepl xiiav éxwidvved- 
ovev] For the final conjunc- 
tions ta, ws, 8rws with past 
tenses of the indicative, see 
Madvig’s Synt. § 131: Good- 
win, Moods and Tenses, § 44, 3: 
and a note on Protag. 335c. 
So below § 28 Ww’ éxiwddveves 
mept xray. Timocr. § 48 wb’ 
édéxers.9 On this penalty for 
frivolous prosecutions, compare 
further, § 26 dmaye* év xidXlas 
5 6 xivduvos and note on 7d 


22 


P, 600.] TIAPANOMON. 29 


5é hevaxiferw aitlas Kal NowWoplas Kevas Trotoupévous, 600 


2? na 2 a / 5 con 5] \ 
Kal évoxnrelv ov SikacTais ToVTwY ovoW vulV. éy@ 
& otpas Seiv vuds mpa@tov pev éxeivo RoyilerOas 

3. ¢ an ’ n ¢ / / \ > / 
Tap viv avtots, OTe TaumoAv Nodopia Te Kal aitia 
Keywpicpevoy éativ édéyxov. aitia péev yap éoTwW, 
OTav TiS WLA® YpHTapevos AOYO pn TapdcynTat 

/ - / >” \ ig e * 7 
misctw wv réyel, EXeyyos Sé, bTaV wy av ei TIS 

% \ ¢ . / »” / ’ / \ 
Kal tarnOes dmod SelEn. Eote Tolvuv avayKn Tovs 
be weed a ul / ? e > an 
éhéyyovtas 7) Texunpia Sexvivar dv av éudhaviodor 


\ \ con a \ a ee / N ' 
TO TioTov vVuiv, H Ta elKoTa Ppalew, H papTupas 


/ 0 P| > \ 16 ee : a ¢ yp 
TAPENET ab Ou yap OlOV T EVL@MV AUTOTTTAS UPMAS 


. , \ a“ b] a ae r. Uy / , 
ETL KATACTHTAL, ANN Eav eT LOELKVUN TUS TL TOUTW), 


P judas om. Z Bens. cum 2. 


méumrov pépos, above § 3,—éxe? 
=in that court, before the 
Thesmothetae. 

épawvdue0a]| Joined to a parti- 
ciple, should be translated ‘were 
proved to be’ false accusers: 
not ‘were thought,’ or ‘ appear- 
ed,’ 

§ 22. «mp&rov per] Introduc- 
ing the answer to Androtion’s 
first objection, that there was 
no foundation for these charges. 
The corresponding éze.ra, as 
G. H. Schaefer notices, is im- 
plied in éray & bre mpds rods 
Oecpobéras mpoctKkey émayyéd- 
Aew, the transition to his se- 
cond objection. 

éray Tis WiA@ XpHoduevos déb- 
yy| ‘When a man makes a 
bare statement without furnish- 
ing any grounds for believing 
him:’ 1. Aphob. p. 830 § 54 
WA@ AOyY XpNTaMEVOS Ws TrLoTEV- 
Onodmevos dv éxetvwy. So in Plat. 
Phaedr. 262 c, Wires ws Aéyo- 
ev, odk eéxovres ixava mapaley- 
para, where Dr Thompson gives 
other meanings of Yds Adyos 
in Plato, e.g. Theaet. 1654, yu- 


Av A6ywv =abstract dialectics, 
but in Laws, 1. 669D, Adyo 
yirol are ‘prose,’ as distin- 
guished from metrical compo- 
sition. 

migrw Gv éye] mlorwv is 
here any sort of proof or evi- 
dence, including rexuypia, elkd- 
Ta, pdptupas, and distinct from 
To miotov below= ‘credibility.’ 
Demosthenes rexunpiov, ‘ cir- 
cumstantial evidence’ is of course 
quite different from Aristotle’s 
‘certain or necessary sign’ (Rhet, 
1. 2 § 16, with Cope’s Introduc- 
tion, p. 161). For eixéra, com- 
pare Cic. de Inv. 1. 29 (46): 
Probabile autem est id, quod 
fere solet fieri, aut quod in opi- 
nione positum est, aut* quod 
habet in se ad haec quandam 
similitudinem, sive id falsum 
est sive verum. 

avromras tuds éotl KaracTi- 
ga] This is certainly one of 
the places where MS. = alone 
outweighs the authority of all 
the rest. To say that in some 
cases the jury could not be 
made eye-witnesses is little 


30 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§§ 23—25. 


ixavov vomitere éreyyxov Exel Upels ELKOTWS THS ANy- 
23 Gelas Exacrote. nels Toivuy ovK ex OYwV ELKOT@V 
ovdée! Texunpiwv, dAdAa Tap ov pardiota Sikny éoTe 
AaBely Toitw, TadT émideixvupev, dvdpa Tapecyn- 
KOTa ypampateiov, év o Ta TOUT BeBiwpéva Eveotwy, 
oa? 


v4 \ , a \ a a A € 
OTav méev Aoldopiay TadTa Kal aiTiay eivat py, UTO- 


Os avTov UmevOvvOY TroLnTas papTupEl TadTa. 


/ bd 4 fal / > ” \ J e 
AauBave? ws tadta pév éotw Ereyyxos, & & ovTos 
A a / \ Se! eo geen, > of iN 
To, TavTa Aoidopia Kal aitia’ oTav S OTL Tpos 
Tovs Oecpobéras mpoonkey errayyédnrew nuiv, éxetvo 
€ al i a 
UmokamBavete, OTL Kal ToUTO Tolnoomev Kal viv 


4 od’ éx Z Bekk. cum libris praeter &. 


better than nonsense: the mean- 
ing of course is, that in some 
cases (he might have said zrod- 
AGv for éviwy) ocular demonstra- 
tion is altogether impossible. 

§ 23. dixny ort AaBeiv TovTw] 
The argument here is well illus- 
trated by Arist. Rhet. 1 15 
§ 17. The side which has elxéra 
but no witnesses is there recom- 
mended to urge that probabili- 
ties cannot be bribed to deceive 
the judges, or convicted of false 
witness (wevdouaprupiav): the 
side which has witnesses, while 
the other side has not, to argue 
that probabilities are not re- 
sponsible (liable to trial and 
penalty) like witnesses, and 
therefore less to be trusted (é- 
xovTe de mpds wn ExovrTa, Ste ovKX 
vmddixa Ta elkéTa, Kal dre ovdev 
dv @de paprupiov, ei ra elkdTa 
ixavov jv Oewphoa). Diodorus 
has a witness, ds a’rov vrevOuvov 
moijoas papTupe ralra, i.e. is 
liable to a ypapyn wWevdouaprv- 
puay. Cross-examination, in the 
modern sense, was little prac- 
tised in the Athenian courts: 
written evidence (ypauparetov 


here) was preferred to oral. 

avdpa tmaperxnKkoTa ypauparec- 
ov] The construction here is 
scarcely grammatical, and Bek- 
ker, with the proviso ‘si quid 
mutandum,’ suggests dvdpds ma- 
peoxnkdros. But G, H. Schaefer 
well observes, in a note which 
contains a lesson often needed 
by conjectural critics: ‘ Viden- 
dum tamen ne hoc pacto non 
librarios sed ipsum scriptorem 
corrigamus, qui fortasse haec 
verba, quum referre deberet ad 
map’ ov, rettulit ad verbum 
proxime antecedens émdelxvv- 
pev’ cuiusmodi inflexiones con- 
structionis notandae, non cor- 
rigendae videntur.’ 

a & ovros movet] To be under- 
stood, I think, of A.’s charges 
against Euctemon and Diodo- 
rus; not, with Reiske and Din- 
dorf, of his repelling the accu- 
sations against himself. The 


-latter could hardly be called 


Aodopia Kal airia. 

mpocnkey émayyé\\ew] ‘We 
ought to have proceeded by way 
of denunciation’ (érayyeNria 
§ 29). 


P. 601.] IITAPANOMON. 31 


U le) 

24 MpoonkovTws Tept Tov vomwov éyouev. Ef pev yap 

” \ 3 A > / a 

G@Andov Twa ayova aywvifouévov cov tadtTa KaTy- 

> fal 
ei O 6 pev viv 
> \ > 4 > U e , ? > 
éveoTnKkas ayov é€oTt Tapavou@v, of voor & ovK 
bia) , 2O\ » ned \ c/ , 
E@ol Aéyew ovde Ta Evvowa Tos ov’TW BeBiwxoTas, 
¢ a / , 
nets & émridetxvupev ov povoy eipnKoTa avTov Tapa- 

b] \ / / al bee) 
voua, adAa Kal BeBiwxdTa Tapavouws, Tas ov) 
, / s a , na 

TpoonKel AéyElv TEpl TOUTOV TOU Vvopmou, Ov ov TadTa 
eNeyXeTAL 5 ; 

Kal prv xaxeivd ye Sei patety vpas, OTL TOUS 
“ 
vopmous 6 TLOcis ToVTOUS LorXwv Kal TdaV aGAdwY ToOds 

\ O\ x 

TONNOVS, OVOEV BuoLOS BY TOUTH VomobéTNs, ovy évl 
25 Yr r \ A 25 D e or a B / 
éOwKe’ TpoT@ Tepl TOY aAdiKnLaTwWY ExacToV AaUBa- 


la) / ] 
yopovpev, Sikalws av nyavaKTess’ 


601 


25 


/ a / \ cal 9 / 
ve Oixnv Tois BovAopévois Tapa TOY adiKOVYTaD, 


GNA TOAAAYAS. 


ots) \ yd af ¢/ \ 
noet yap, oiuat, TOVO, BTL Tors 


r 6é5wxe Bens, cum OQkst et edd. vett. 


mpoonkdvTws mept Tod vopuou] 
‘That we are properly referring 
to the law’ against éralpnots. 

§ 24. ef...ovK édor] ovK éadv 
is a single notion = drayopevery, 
and therefore ov regularly fol- 
lows ef. Comp. on § 18 «i & 
ovK é&eoTt. 

radra] ‘This criminality’ of 
Androtion’s. 

§§ 25—29. But once more, 
that we ought to have proceeded 
against him in one way, and 
not in another, is contrary to 
the whole spirit of Athenian 
legislation. The law allows a 
variety of remedies for every 
sort of wrong: some by criminal 
prosecution, others again by way 
of civil action: and this because 
men vary so much in their power 
of taking care of themselves. 
Take, for example, the different 
modes of redress open to a man 


who has been robbed; or the 
various ways of prosecuting in 
a case of impiety. It is for the 
accused to prove his innocence, 
not to dictate the mode of pro- 
cedure against him. In like 
manner, Androtion, don’t ima- 
gine that you are to escape 
punishment because we have 
brought a ypadh rapavouwr when 
we might have laid an érayye- 
Nia: tf we forbear to prosecute 
you in all the ways which the 


laws allow, be thankful to us 


for those we omit. 

§ 25. o riGeis] An imperfect 
participle, as is shown by @wxe 
and 7éec following. 

ovdév duotos wy TovTw vomobé- 
tns| This sarcasm recurs Ti- 
mocr. §§ 103, 106. Comp. 
below § 73, jin. Gmoidy ye, ov 
yap; 1. Steph. p. 1118 § 56 


“Ouows ye 6 Aewias. 


32 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§§ 26, 27. 


> al , / 
€v TH Tone yevérBar Travtas cpoiws® 7) Sewors 7 


a ay? / > x ” 
Opacets ) wetpious ovK av ein. 


> \ > 4 a 
€l EV OVV, WS TOLS 


petplows Sixnv éEapKécer AaPelv, oVTW Tors vopous 
Once, wet adeias EceaOar Toddods Tovnpovs HyeEtTo, 
ei 8 ws toils Opacéot cal Suvatois Aéyew, Tos 
iidras ov SuvycecOar Tov avTov TovTOLs TpoTOP 


26 ANawBavew Sixny. Seiv 8 Peto undéva atroctepeicbar 


§ duolous Z Bekk. 


Sewvods] ‘Clever,’ = duvarots 
Aéyew, below: joined with 6pa- 
avs also in § 31. Comp. the 
fuller expression ofrws dv Opa- 
avs kal Néyew Sewds, § 66. In 
all these passages we have xal, 
not 7: and Cobet approves of 
Dobree’s conjecture duolws det- 
vods kal Opaceis, omitting 4 ye- 
tplovs. In Kurip. Bacch, 270-1, 
Opacds dé duvards kal Héyeuv 
olds 7’ dvnp, Suvvards can hardly 
be anything but a gloss on olds 
ve: and Dr Badham ingeniously 
conjectures Opacds 5’ év dorois. 
Plato is fond of joining cogds 
kat dewds: see on Protag. 341 8. 
Opposed to dewovs 7 Opaceis, ué- 
tpcos includes both intellect, 
‘simple, unsophisticated,’ and 
temper, ‘quiet, well-behaved.’ 
On iduérns, ‘the layman, as dis- 
tinguished from the member of 
a learned profession or the spe- 
cialist (ératwv), here of course 
the man unversed in public 
speaking, opposed to duvarovs 
évyeev, cf. Protag. 3128, Dr 
Thompson on Gorg. 455 B. 

§ 26. A locus classicus on 
Attic procedure in case of felony 
(xaxovpyla), deserving a careful 
comparison with the vdéuo Kdo- 
ahs «.7.A. (not the actual text 
of the law but, in this instance 
at least, compiled from authen- 
tic materials) in Timocr, § 105, 


and the orator’s account in the 
same speech, §§ 113, 114. 

The democratic spirit of 
Athenian legislation aimed at 
effecting a real equality of rich 
and poor before the law, by the 
variety of remedies it provided 
against the wrong-doer; and 
further, as we learn from the 
present passage, sought to neu- 
tralise the advantages of bodily 
strength, pugnacity and readi- 
ness of speech. 

We find here (1) draywyi, 
(2) édiyynors, (3) ypaph or pub- 
lic indictment, (4) 6ixn or a 
private suit for restitution of 
the stolen goods with compen- 
sation. To these might have 
been added @&deés which, 
though properly an ‘informa- 
tion’ against one who, being 
driuos, obtained an office or 
usurped a right from which he 
was disqualified, was likewise 
used in a more general sense 
(cf. Schoemann, Assemblies, p. 
177). For fuller details the stu-: 
dent is necessarily referred to 
Dict. Antiq. 8. vv.: we may 
here indicate the main distinc- 
tions between these several pro- 
cesses. In draywyi the com- 
plainant took upon himself the 
responsibility of the arrest with- 
out previous legal steps, and 
incurred the risk of resistance 


27 


P, iat 


éoTalt ToUTO; éav TOANAS OdOUS o cua 
él Tovs nouKnKoTas, olov THs KAOTHS. 





Eppwoat Kab 


an aes aes tar / + ee 

cavT@ TisTevers’ amraye’ év yidlais 8 6 Kivduvos. 
Le n y As an 

aobevéotepos ei’ Tois apyovow épnyod’ TodTO TroUN- 


Gouclv EeKELVOL. 


goBet Kat todtTo’ ypadou. 


KaTA- 


, x ; : 
wéuhes ceavtov Kal wévyns wv ovK av éyous yodias 


and of forfeiting 1000 drach- 
mas. In édiynors the proceed- 
ings were still summary, though 
less so than in the former case: 
the prosecutor applied first to 
the magistrate and conducted 
him and his officers to the spot 
where the capture was to be 
effected. In &dekis a written 
information (also called évdeécs) 
was laid before the magistrate, 
whose duty it then became to 
arrest or hold to bail the ac- 
cused. 

Prof, Jebb in a note to Attic 
Orators 1. 57 appears to doubt 
altogether this technical use of 
amayuyn. He writes: ‘The 
terms évderks Kaxoupylas and 
amaywy) kaxoupylas do not de- 
note two different processes, but 
two parts of the same process. 
"Evdeéis was the laying of in- 
formation against a person not 
yet apprehended: dmraywyt was 
the act of apprehending him.’ 
Unquestionably we are not re- 
quired to assign the technical 
meaning to every passage where 
the words drdyew or amraywy} 
occur; but that draywyn did 
not merely denote arrest fol- 
lowing information, but, as a 
law-term, was applied to a sum- 
mary process especially directed 
against offenders caught Jla- 
grante delicto (éx’ airopuwpy), is 
not only the natural inference 
from the present passage, but 
supported by the express testi- 


W. D. 


mony of the grammarians (Har- 
pocration, Hesychius, Suidas, 
Bekk. Anecd. 1.200, 414) and 
the judgment of modern writers 
(Schoemann in his latest work - 
the Antiquities as well as in 
Att. Process, Westermann in 
Pauly’s Real-Encycl. ed. 2, Cail- 
lemer in Daremberg and Saglio). 
See further c. Conon. p. 1256 
gl Evoxos.. TH Tap Awrdduray 
araywyn kalry THs UBpews ypadh, 
where Mr Sandys does not ques- 
tion the received view. The 
passage in Lys. c. Agorat. §§ 
85—6 deals with a case in which 
amraywyy followed évieés, but 
by no means proves that this 
was always the rule, 

The well-known distinction 
between diky and ypad7 calls 
for no particular remark: it 
may, however, be noticed that 
the dixy or private action was 
not necessarily before a Diaete- 
tes as in the text; it might also 
be before a court, ’ probably that 


‘of the Thesmothetae (Meier, 


Att. Process, p. 67). 

Tots apxovow épyyov] Accord- 
ing to the usual meaning of 
yyetcOa with a dative, ‘guide’ 
the magistrates’ or ‘show them 
the way’ to the spot. The term 
dpxwv is not limited to the nine; 
édnynots might be carried out by 
the Thesmothetae, or still more 
frequently by the Eleven (oi 
évdexa). 

§ 27. ceauTov] 


3 


KaTapeuper 


34 KATA ANAPOTIONOS 


[§$ 27, 28. 


éxticat’ Sixafov KroTHS mpods SvavtnTnv, Kab ov 


KLVOVYEUCELS. 


’ / \ , 
TouT@v' ovdév éoTL TO AUTO. 


THS ace- 


’ \ Pe ae ’ t ’ 6 8 , 
Beas xaTa TavTa éoTw arayew, ypapeoCat, dtxa- 


t Z Bekk. [ovdérepov BovAct TovTwr; ypdgov. Katoxvels kal rabryy; 


éepnyod} cum libris. 


The sense of ‘blaming’ or ‘ find- 
ing fault with’ passes into that 
of ‘distrusting’ or ‘feeling a 
want of confidence.’ So in the 
youthful oration m1. Aphob. 
p. 844 § 1 he says xarukvour dy 
Thy épavrod karamendbpevos 7Xt- 
xtay. In Eurip. Hec. 885, 1184 
the simple verb péudopma: bears 
the same meaning: but in Hel. 
31 "Hpa 5& peupbets’ over’ ov 
wmk@ Oeds it is ‘dissatisfied, 
disappointed,’ a somewhat dif- 
ferent sense. Liddell and Scott 
do not notice these usages. 


Scarrynrnv] In a Sixn Krow7s 


only the publie arbitrators ap- 
pointed by lot («Anpwrol) can be 
intended: the private arbitra- 
tors chosen by mutual agree- 
ment between the parties (aipe- 
rol) and implying a more or 
less friendly suit, are not to be 
thought of. On the whole sub- 
ject of the Diaetetae, the exhaus- 
tive treatise of Hudtwalcker, 
Ueber die Dititeten, 1812, has 
left little to be corrected by later 
scholars: and it is closely fol- 
lowed by Mr Whiston in his 


carefully-written article m Dict. 


Antiq. Something, however, is 
to be gleaned from K. F. Her- 
mann (Staatsalterth. § 145), 
Schoemann (Antiq. pp. 471—3), 
Westermann, in the Transac- 
tions of the Saxon Academy of 
Sciences, 1. 438, and especially 
Perrot (Essai sur le droit Public 
ad’ Athénes, pp. 284—309). The 
question of their number still 
remains doubtful, notwithstand- 
ing some important lightthrown 


upon it of late years. Ulpian 
had stated it at 440, i.e. 44 from 
each tribe (joav dé réooapes Kar 
TecoapaxorvTa Kal’ éxdorny purr, 
scholia on Demosth. Mid. p. 542 
§ 86). This number seems un- 
necessarily large: the orators 
often mention only one arbitra- 
tor in each case: and an easy 
correction of Ulpian’s words 
was suggested—joar 5é¢ recoa- 
pdxovra, téocapes Kal’ éExdorny 
pvdjv, making the total number 
40. This conelusion has again 
been disturbed. An inscription 
of about B.c. 325 (first published 
in Ross, Demen von Attika p. 22, 
also in Rhangabé’s colleetion, 
no. 1163) names the Diaetetae 
who had actually served in that 
year, and had been rewarded 
with a crown. The numbers 
mentioned from the different 
tribes vary between 16 in the 
Cecropis and 3 in the Pandionis, 
in all 104 names. UH, as is pro- 
bable, an equal number was 
chosen from each tribe, there 
must have been at least 160 of 
them. The fact that not all the 
Diaetetae of the year are com- 
memorated in the inseription 
is easily explicable: those who 
were most in request would be 
summoned oftenest, some per- ' 
haps not at all (Schoemann, 
Perrot p. 292), 

THs aoeBeias]| The list here 
given does not exhaust all the 
forms of prosecution for this 
offence. Besides araywy7 and 
doeBelas ypady, the accuser 
might proceed by évdevécs (Andoce, 


28 


P. 602.] 


IIAPANOMON. 


35 


\ ’ / 
fecOar mpos Kvponridas, dpagew mpos tov Bacinéa, 
TEpt TOV GAXoV aTdvTwY Tov avTov TpoTOV. cyeddv. 


> Py , e \ oh a f PI] \ ‘ x ¢ 
€L 01) TLS WS MEV OVYXL KAKOUPYOS EcTL LN AEYOL, 7) WS 602 


b] > 7 ) na 
ovK acehns, ) 6 Tt SHoT ein Sv 0 Kpivorto, did TadTa 
8 > ey ’ / > \ > / byA , \ 

exhevyew avoin, eb pev arnypévos ein, Store Tpos 
Scary thy eEfv avT@ Aaxelv Kal ypadecOat ypnv’, 

\ \ a / 7 a 

dé mpos dsaurnth hevyo., Ste yphy ce ardyew, Ww 


Y xpnv om. Z. 


de Myst. § 8 and passim) mpo- 
Bory (Liban. Argum. Mid. p. 
509), or elcayyedla (Andoc. de 
Myst. § 43). Of the latter class 
was the indictment of Alcibi- 
ades, preserved by Plutarch Al- 
cib. 22 (elonyye\er): compare 
Grote ch. 58 (vy. 183). The two 
other courses, ducdfecOa pos Eu- 
Morrldas and dpafew mpos Tov 
Baowéa, are mentioned only in 
the present passage. It may 
safely be assumed that the 
latter was a device, like those 
just referred to in:the case of 
k\or7, for the protection of the 
diffident accuser; by denounc- 
ing an act of impiety to the 
king-archon, he might escape 
responsibility for himself, and 
leave it to that magistrate to 
take up the charge or not. 
Funkhaenel (Prolegom. p. 27) 
seems right in explaining ¢pd- 
gew as a delatio merely, not, 
with Meier, as an actio. It is 
clear also that dixdgecPac mpos 
Evpodridas applied to the pro- 
fanation of the Eleusinian mys- 
teries, of which the family of 
the Eumolpidae were hereditary 
guardians. Caillemer further 
conjectures that the action of 
the Eumolpidae was confined to 
‘ spiritual censures’ (des peines 
religieuses, telles que l’exclu- 
sion des mystéres ou la priva- 
tion du titre d’initié, sans in- 


fluer sur l’état civil et politique 
du coupable) ; and that the other 
sacred family, the Kerykes, pos- 
sessed the same authority (ap. 
Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Ase- 
beias Graphé). That the two 
processes might become practi- 
cally identical appears from a 
scholium quoted by Dindorf: 0 
yap Bactreds émepedetro Tov 
lepaw Tpayuarwv Kal ér7ye Tas 
THs aceBelas ypadas mpos Tovs 
Evwodmlias. An important 
passage on the Eumolpidae is 
Lys. c. Andoc. § 10: the laws 
of which they were the é£nynrat 
or expounders, were unwritten, 
and of immemorial antiquity. 

§ 28. smpds dar yr ny—axety] 
sc. dlxnv, expressed in Neaer, 
p. 1378 § 98 of ID\arace?s Aay- 
xdvovor Sixny Trois Aaxedarpovlos 
eis rods ’Audixrvovas: more 
usually omitted, as here and 
Mid. p. 554 § 120. In Nausim. 
p. 985 §§ 1, 2 we have both 
phrases within a few lines: adv. 
Everg. et Mnesib. p. 1160 § 69 
the construction is the same as 
here, rpds tov Baoiéa 7} Aay- 
xdvew. Funkhaenel, who col- 
lects these passages, wrongly 
adds to them 11. Steph. p. 1136 
§ 23 vudv rods Aaxdévras where it 
is used of the jury, not the 
prosecutor. 

mpos Siaryrn gdevyo] The 
change of case after mpds should 


37-2 


29 Toinkey émideLKvUVal. 


36. KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§$ 28—31. 


éxivOuveves Tept yid@v, yédos av eln SHtrovOev. ov 
yap Tov ye wndev tremoinKota Set wept Tov TpdTrov 
ovtiwva ypn Swddovar Sixny avtiréyewv, GAN ws od Te- 


Tov avtov 62) Tporrov, “Avdpo- 


tiov, Kal od po) Sid tadra olov cou mpoonKey ps) 
Sodvar Sixny, ei ypades nTaipnKas, OTL Kal Tpds TODS 
Oecpobétas of nyiv érayyedla’ adn 1 SeiEov ov 
TeTOLNnKOTA TAaVTAa cEavTOY, 1) Sikny UTrexe OY yéypa- 
gas TL ToLodTOS WY" ov yap eLecTi cor. ei 5é cE wn” 
TAVTAS, OTOUS OL VOmoL Siddaci, TPOTrOUS Tiuw@povpeOa, 
yap npiv av maparelropev éxelvov exe, wn Sid 
tadr’ a&lov undéva tpdrov Sobvac* Slenv. 

"AEvov toivuy, @ avdpes “AQnvaio, Kal Tov Oévta 


* dSodva: rpdrov Bens. cum =. 


be noticed. The reading of two 
inferior mss. dvairyrnv could 
only mean ‘ fly for refuge’ to an 
arbitrator: the sense required 
is, ‘if he were defending an 
action before’ an arbitrator. 
wy’ éxwdvveves] § 21, note. 
rév-ye undev memovnkdra] Indefi- 
nitely, ‘one who has done no- 
thing’ wrong: and so = ‘the de- 
fendant, if he be innocent.’ __ 
§ 29. ei ypdpers nrapykws] ‘if 
you move decrees (Wndicuara) 
after having committed infamous 
crime,’ K. The distinction be- 
tween ypddew and ypadecOau is 
important in these four §§. 
érayyeNia] Dict. Antiq. 8. V. 
and compare § 23 érayyé\eu. 
dy yéypadds 71] A mixed con- 
struction, expressing that A. 
deserved punishment (1) for what 
hehad proposed (because illegal), 
(2) for proposing anything at all 
(because disqualified). Ms. 2 
has here preserved (with one 
other) the more difficult but un- 
doubtedly truereading ; themass 


of inferior copies give ei yéypa- 
gas Tt, Which expresses only (2), 
Cobet’s correction, dv yéypapas 
omitting 71, expresses only (1), 
and has not the merit of inge- 
nuity. Comp. § 33 ov« édvra 
ypadew oé, 008 & rots dAdots 
e£eor1, Tov vdmov.' 

ay mapanelrouer éxelvwv] Not 
=E€xelvwy Gv maparelrouer, but 
‘be thankful for all that we 
omit, out of those (possible) 
ways’: éx Tob éxelyew Tov Tpdrwy 
dp.0u00, Reiske. 

§§ 30—32. Conclusion of the 
argument on the law of éraipyots. 
Motive of the legislator in en- 
acting it. The author of this 
law was thinking much more of 
the constitution than of the im- 
mediate subject of any law that 
he was passing. If he had wished 
to punish such men, he might 
have devised many severer penal- 
ties; and he thought it no hard- 
ship to silence them, for most of 
you Athenians, who are at liberty 
to move decrees, do not avail 


= 


P. 602.] ITAPANOMON. 37 


A / / / 
Tov vouov é&eTdcat Yorwva, kal OcacacBar bonv 
/ lal 7 A 
Mpovovay émrovetro év amacw ots ériPes vomuows THS 
s \ a7 \ t A 3 / 
TONLTELAS, Kal OO@ TEpl TOVTOV MaAXOV éoTrovdalev 
a \ n / y e / \ , 

) Tepl Tov Tpaypatos” ov TLUEin Tov vomov. ToAXA- 
50 \ > v 16 Qn b] ef > PJ 
yobev méev ovv av Tis dot TodTO, ovy HKicTa S ex 

a / / a 
TOUTOV TOU VOmov, NTE eye pHTe ypadhe éFeivat 
a ¢ r ey \ Cal n a 
Tols NTaLpnKOTW. é@pa yap éxetvo, OTL Tots TONXOTS 
¢ Cal Soe / ] / ef Prvid +O \ ¢. a 
vpav e€ov Néyeww ov A€yeTEe, WoTE TOUT OVdEY HYEtTO 
> > 
Bapv, kal Ton av eixev, ef ye Korafev éBovrETO 
Li a 
TOUTOUS, YaneTrwTeEpa Geivar. 
dacev, ddd TadTa atreirev VTEp Vuodv Kal THS Tro- 
\ b al > a 
ATelas. HOEr yap, WSet Tois aicypas BeBvaxdcw 603 
c n 3 7 
amTac@v ovcay évayvTiwTaTnyv ToNTElay év t TacLW 
” / , / > / 
é£eots Néyew Kaxelvov oveldn. 


5 3 5 fal 
GAN ov TOUT éatrov- 


” >] A / 
éote & avtn Tis; Sn- 
v 
pokpatia. ovKovy évoufev dodpanres, el Tote cup B7- 
, / 
ceras yevecOar cvyvovs avOpwrrous Kata Tods avTOvs 


Y mpdypuaros avrod Z Bekk. 


yourselves of the privilege, but he 
felt that men of immoral lives 
could not be well affected to the 
democratic constitution; they 
would naturally prefer an oli- 
garchy, where it is not allowable 
to speak ill of the rulers. His 
object was, therefore, to prevent 
such persons from corrupting the 
people and bringing it down.to 
their own level: or from betray- 
ing it into blundering counsels. 

§ 30. é&erdcat DdrAwva] ‘to 
look into the character of 8S.’ 
The revered name of Solon is as 
usual attached to democratic 
legislation, which must really 
have dated from the time of 
Cleisthenes or Pericles. 

THs wodirelas] Harpocration : 
Tlodirele tdiws eldOacr xpjoPac ot 
Abnropes émt ris Snuwoxpartias. 
Sometimes ‘ republics’ generally 


as opposed to arbitrary govern- 
ment, as in x. Olynth. p. 10 § 5 
Odws dmricTor, olwat, Tals moXrel- 
ats 7 Tupavvls : sometimes demo- 
cratic republics in general, as in 
de Rhod. Lib. p. 196 § 20 rods 
Tas oNwTelas KaTadvévras Kal 
peOicrdvras eis O\vyapxiav: but 
in the mouth of an Athenian 
most naturally ‘the consti- 
tution,’ =rov djpor § 32. 

mept Tovrou] i.e. THs tohtrelas, 
as in 11. Olynth. p. 22 § 15 6 bev 
SéEns ewiOuued Kal rovTo éf7- 
Awe, With more in Jelf, Synt. 
§ 311, Obs. 2, Madvig, Synt. 
§ 99 a. 

§ 31. raira deter] ‘he im- 
posed the disabilities I speak of,’ 
K. It is difficult not to believe 
that Demosthenes wrote rat’ 
dareirrev, aS Benseler has silently 
corrected. 


38 KATA ANAPOTIONOS _ [§§ 31—34. 


/ > a \ PS \ \ 0 a , 8 
xpovous eimrety pev Sewvods Kal Opaceis, TovovTwv 
? a \ a Ra a Gael \ A 
32 dvedav Kal KAKOY peoTOVs' TOAAG yap av TOV OhHpmov 
Um avtav vraylévta éEawaprteiv, Kaxeivovs Tob 
Katanvoal y av weipdcOat TO mapatav Tov Sipov 
> \ al > / »090~CSN 5 ¥ 3 9 / 
(év yap tais odvyapyiais, ovd av daw ér ’Avdpotio- 
vos Tives alaytov BeBiwxKores, ovK EcTL AéyeLty KAKOS 
Tovs dpxovrTas) 7) Tpodyew ay ws TovNnpoTaTouS 
ceivat, tv’ ws dpotoTatot odio @at. THY ovVv apxXnP 
TOS TOLOVTOLS ATrEiTrE f47) pmeTEXELVY TOU TUUPMovrEVELY, 
vA \ \ ¢ Lal > / e 
iva pr) pevaxiobeis 6 Shpos eEauaptor pndév. wv 
> / ¢ \ > \ % 3 > / 7 
Oduywpnoas 6 KaXOS earya os avrasres piNOY men 
Seip déryew Kal ypadew avn é&ov, Gra Kal aOR 
TOUS vopous TavTa Troveiy. 
, ey OR ] / 
33 ~=— Tlepi wey toivuy Tod vomov, Ka?’ ov wpdAnKOTOS 
avTov Tod TaTpos TO Snpwoolw YpnuaTa Kat avK. éKTE- 


elrretv nev Sewods] G. H. Schae- 
fer notes this as a refinement 
(reconditior) on the usual dewods 
Aéywr, cf. § 25, Lept. p. 502 § 150 
ovdévos ATTov, w dvSpes ’AOnvatos, 
Tov NeyovTwv Sewos elweiv, de 
Symmor. P. 180 § 8. 

§ 32. thy odv dpxm] § 5. 

va pa] The reading of T 2% 
r iva 5y wy is rather attractive, 
if the ms. authority for it were 
higher, Funkhaenel approves it. 

0 Kados Kayabos ovTos] Troni- 
cally, ‘this honourable man.’ 
So in § 47 where A.’s political 
antecedents are to be held up to 
scorn. Cobet, Var. Lect. p. 71, 
remarks on xados kd-yados, To\Ad 
xaya0a and the like, as a ‘ per- 
petuacrasis’ ; i.e. cal ayaos wher- 
ever found in the mss. is to be 
corrected as absolutely inadmis- 
sible. 

@ero Seiv] Like the English 
equivalent‘ thought proper,’ this 
is used of an impropriety. Mid, 
p. 561 § 143 Bdedupos Kal vBpr- 


orhs wero detv elvar. Below, §§ 56, 
63, Timocr. § 65 jélwoer. 

§§ 33,34. The argument of. 
§§ 25—29, that it is not for the 
defendant to dictate the mode of 
procedure against him, applied 
to another point in the ease. 
With regard to his responsibility 
for his father’s debts to the public, 
which debars him from speaking 
while they remain unpaid, he may 
say that we ought to have pro- 
ceeded by way of denunciation 
(&5ecks). All in good time: we 
shall do so one day; but mean- 
while the burden of proof lies 
upon you, Androtion. Prove that 
your father was not adjudged @ 
defaulter, or that he got out of 
prison not by running away but 
by satisfying the debt. You know 
that by law you inherit his disa- 
bilities in such cases. 

These, men of the jury, should 
be your answers if he makes any 
attempt to deceive you and lead 
you astray. 


P. 603. ] TTAPANOMON. 39 


/ , 4 / 3QO\ / r " nA 
TUKOTOS OVK e&eoTL AEyELV OVSE ypadheLy TOUTw, TaUTA 
Py / / . x 4 » AON aX lal a ¢e fal b] 

iKala Eye av eyolTeE EiKOTS, av hy Seiv nuas av- 
\ , / a 
Tov” évdetKvUVal. TOTE Yap TOUTO TroLnTOpeEY, Ov pa 
A ’ aA nA ees PS} a e-7 ., > val a 
L OUYL VUV, NYLKa Sel GE ETEPwWY OV abLKeis SodVaL 
/ 3 a "4 5 n wn 
NOyov, GAN Grav 7 TpocHKov €x TOD vouov. Kal vov 
\ / > n e cal 
dé Seixvupev™ ovK éovTAa ypadewv ce, OVS & Tis GAXNOLS 
” \ / e Ss > 3 ¢ / 
34 €€€oTL, TOV VOMOV. WS OUY OVK BdhrEV 6 TATHP Cou, 
By £D / x > aA a 
TOUT émloerEov, ) Ws oVK aTrodpas €ENAOEV ex Tod Se- 
Bd \ \ ee 
cuwTnplov, GAA Ta ypnwata exTicas. et Sé p) 
af « / es be Io \ , 
Tav0’ &€eis Seixvivat, ovn éEdv yéypadhas* KANpovomov 
/ / ¢ a 
yap ce cabioTyow oO vomos THS GTYyLlas THS TOU Ta- 


% atrov om. Z. Bekk. Bens. cum =. 


® deixvupmer 6¢ Z Bens. cum =r. 


§ 33. ravra dixaa] Benseler 
and R. W., after Jerome Wolf, 
rightly take this of what follows: 
‘these are the answers which 
you might reasonably make.’ 
Funkhaenel attempts to prove 
that the words refer to ov« gears 
évyew ovdé ypddew: quoted, to 
my surprise, with approbation 
by Dindorf. 

Seiv nuas évdecxvivat] The verb 
used absolutely for laying an 
évdecéis. So Theocrin. p. 1337 
§ 45 ypader Oa, palvew, évdeuxv- 
ew ‘proceed by way of ypady, 
gdors, évdeckis.’ 

TOTE yap TOTO Tomnoouer] Com- 
pare the end of § 23 for the same 
argument in almost the same 
words. 

kal vov dé dSelxvusev] The 
Zurich Editors and Benseler are 
most likely right in reading xa 
viv Selxvuyev 5¢ with ms. >. It 
is quite the usage of Demo- 
sthenes to put a verb emphati- 
cally between xal and 6é; ut. 
Olynth. p. 32 § 15 kat rpaéar dé 
SuyncecGe viv: 111. Phil. p. 129 
§ 70 éyo vn AV ép@, kal ypdiw dé 
‘and what is more,’ 


§ 34. Gddev] Not merely 
‘owed money’ (wderer) but 
‘had a decree out against him, 
was inscribed in the public ac- 
counts as a defaulter.’ We say 
dgelthew xpnuara, but ddducKa- 
vew, opretv Siknv. The distinc- 
tion is rightly noted by G. H. 
Schaefer on Timocr. § 50. 

decxvivat] Most MSS. includ- 
ing read deccvvecy, retained by 
the Zurich editors and Benseler 
and probably written by De- 
mosth. for the sake of variety. 
Dindorf leaves devxvtew un- 
altered, Timocr. §§ 35, 66, 68. 
Cobet, however, lays down the 
rule against such forms, Var. 
Lect. p. 317: ‘decxview, daxviw, 
duvdw et similia sequiora sunt 
et sub Menandri aetatem pro- 
pullularunt.’ 

KAnpordmov Tns areas] 
Dict. Antiq. s. v. Atimia, and 
Boeckh, P. E. p. 391. Atimia 
was not usually inherited ex- 
cept by the children of public 
debtors, among whom Cimon 
the son of Miltiades is a well- 
known instance. The harsh- 
ness with which the law might 


40 


Tpos, OyTs © aTip@ cot éyeLv Od MpooHnKev oVvdée ypa- 604 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [8§ 34, 35. 


dew. Kal tepl pev TOV Vopr, ods Tapeypayrapel, 

olwac Seiv Uuds, dv te hevaxileiv éyyeiph nal Tapa- 

yew ovTOS, TAU vrorapBaver, & SieEeANAVOA eyo. 
Eiol 6é cal wepl Tay GAXNwv avT@ oyou pos TO 


be enforced is vividly depicted 
in the opening of the speech 
against Neaera, p. 1347 §§ 5—8. 
The law of Timocrates, against 
which the Timocriteais directed, 
was expressly designed to miti- 
gate the rigour with which pub- 


lic debtors were treated, and will. 


afford an opportunity for the 
fuller discussion of this question. 
See Timocr. §§ 45, 50, 54. 

mapeypawduebal ‘which we 
have cited against him,’ K. who 
adds in a note: ‘the laws which 
Androtion violated by his decree, 
which we have eopied out and 
exhibited in court in juxta-posi- 
tion with his decree.’ So in 
de Cor. p. 263 § 111 trav rapa- 
yeypappévev vouoy of the laws 
hung up on a table (cavidiov) by 
the side of Ctesiphon’s decree 
for the judges to compare. 
From this primary sense of 
mwapaypadew, to write as it were 
in parallel columns, we get the 
technical usage of rapaypagn, & 
‘pill of exceptions, demurrer, 
or special plea’ in bar to an 
action, with the phrases zrapa- 
yagi dddvat (c. Phorm. p. 912 
§ 17) or rapaypapecOax (c. Lacr. 
p. 939 § 45). The high legal 
authority of Mr Mansfield (in 
Dict. Antiq. 8. v. Paragraphe) is 
against the correctness of the 
word ‘demurrer,’ by which 
mapaypapy is commonly trans- 
lated: according to him ‘special 
plea’ is, in English law, the 
more exact equivalent. 


ay tu gevaxifev eyxepp Kal 


maptyev] We may join r with 
éyxeupj, and supply judas with 
gevaxifew kal rapayew: there is 
none of the difficulty which was 
noticed on § 4 mddrrwv Kal 
wapiywr. Pevaxtfew Tivd is the 
usual construction, as in the 
next §; gevax. and gevax. Tivd 
7t are rarer, but occur de F. L. 
p. 362 § 66=74 ris 6 Taira 
gevakicas; and p. 363 § 72=81 
Gy mwedevaxixe THv modu. See 
Shilleto’s Annot. Crit. on the 
former. passage. 

§§ 35-37. But, it will be 
urged, if you condemn Androtion 
you will put a stigma upon the 
whole senate by depriving them 
of the customary compliment. 
To this, I answer (1) that, even 
if it were so, the disappointment 
of 500 men at missing a reward, 
which after all they have not 
deserved, ought not to weigh 
against the interests of the state, 
and the opportunity of reading a 
useful lesson to the citizens at 
large. But further (2) I am 
prepared to maintain that the 
discredit does not attach to the 
senate as a body or to its ‘silent 
members,’ but only to Androtion 
and the other mischief-making 
orators who manage the senate 
as they please. And even grant- 
ing for the sake of argument 
that the whole body is not upon 
its trial, it is (3), much more 
your interest to convict than to 
acquit. If you acquit, the senate 
will be still, as it is now, ruled 
by the professional speakers : 


Pp. 604.] 


ITAPANOMON. 41 


dhevaxilew vbyuds ed peunyavnpévor, wept dv BéXTLOVv 


Umas TpoaKovaat. 


4 \ @ > A fa) 
€oTL yap els avT@ ToLOvTOS, [1) 


mevtakoclous vuav avtav adedécbat tiv Swpeadv 


pndé oveider mrepiBanreiv ° 


“ee a b) Vv 
EXELVMVY O AYWMV, OUK €EfLOS. 


eyo & et pev euédreTe adaipyoecbar TovTovs povor, 

Grro Sé pndev Ghednoew THY TOrALY, OVdeV a DMas 
' , Yes ey AS fs n a 

ohodpa orovdalew n&lovy’ et 5é TH ToUTO Tonoat 


/ x / \ 
TELOUS N pUpLoUS TOUS 


but if you condemn, the ordinary 
members will no longer leave 
everything to these self-elected 
leaders, whose misconduct has 
cost the senate its crown: they 
will take the trouble to think 
for themselves, and advise for 
the best. It is sufficient reason 
to justify a conviction, if it only 
enables you to get rid of the 
Orators ! 

§ 35. dedéoOat...mepiBaretv] 
The reading apéAnoe...mepiBa- 
Ante (yp. Z.) no doubt arose out 
of the return to the direct con- 
struction in éxelywy 6 dyor, ovK 
éués: ‘They are upon their 
trial,’ says Androtion, ‘and not 
I.’ But the blending of the 
two constructions in one sen- 
tence is not unusual. Dindorf 
compares, after Funkhaenel, 
Xen. Cyrop. 1. iv. 28 évradéa 
57 Tov Kipov yedaoar re éx Toy 
mpba dev daxptwv kal etmeiy avT@ 
dm vov Ta, Bappeiv, ore md peor a 
avrots odl-you xpovou wore Opav cot 
&eorar Kav BovdAy aoKapdamucrl: 
where however L. Dindorf reads 
opav terra Kav BovAnra. There 
are several instances in the 
Greek of the N. T. e.g. Acts i. 4 
mepyevery THhv émayyeNav Tov 
Tarpos Hv HKovaoaré nov. 

el ev éuédrere ddarpjoecOan 
rovrous movoy]| ‘if your only ob- 
ject were to deprive them;’ not 
TouTous movoy, ‘them only.’ 


adXous Tonritas BeATiovs 


m)elous 7 vplovs] The state- 
ment in the not Demosthenic, 
but certainly contemporary 
speech (perhaps by Hyperides) 
I. Aristog. p. 785 § 51 eicly duov 
Sicpdpro. raves’ AOnvaio, is well 
supported by other testimony: 
and Reiske accordingly wished 
to read dicuvplovs here. In this, 
however, he has had no one to 
agree with him ; strict accuracy 
was not required; and ‘more 
than 10,000’ is quite enough to 
point Demosthenes’ argument. 
Besides, pvploe (paroxytone in 
this sense, according to the 
grammarians) is the usual 
Greek word for an indefinitely 
large number, Lat.  sescenti. 
The evidence as to the number 
of citizens is collected and criti- 
cised by Boeckh in his chapter 
on the population of Attica (P. 
E. 1. vii, especially pp. 32—35). 
Omitting Cecrops and the times 
before Cleisthenes as prehistoric 
we get the figures 19,000, in- 
cluding those who were rejected 
on a scrutiny, in a census of 
B.C. 445, 19,000 in the time of 
Lycurgus (contemporary with 
Demosthenes; for twelve years, 
probably s.c. 342—330, what 
we might call Chancellor of the 
Exchequer, raylas 0 ért ry dto- 
knoe, to the. Athenian state, 
Mahaffy Gr. Lit. u. p. 366): 
21,000 in a doubtful census 


36 


42 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS [§§ 35—37. 


3 / , , t 
Elva TPOTPEWETE, TOTW KAANLOY TOTOVTOUS TAPATKEv- 
' \ 
agat ypnotovs 7) TevTaKocios adixws yapicacar ; 
e >) mw » ¢ , \ a fal fol > \ 
ws 5 ovd éotw aracns TO wpdypya THs Bovdjs, ara 
a 7 > A a 
TWOP, olTep eloly aitios TOV KaKaV, Kal “AvdpoTio- 
4 / an al 
OS, Ex NEYELV. TO yap oti SveLbos, Eb TLMTOVTOS 
> a 
auTov Kal pndév ypadorTos, iaws Sé ovdé Ta TOANG 
> \ \ 
els TO BovAeuTnpLov eiatovTos, wn NaBot 7 BovaAr) Tov 
orépavov ; ovdev) Snmrovbev, ddAXa Tod ypadovTos Kat 
mToNLTevouévou Kal teiGovtos & BovAotTO THY Bov- 


under Antipater 323: the 
same number better attested 
under Demetrius Phalereus 


309: 20,000 fighting men ina 
genuine writing of Plato, Cri- 
tias 112 p (referring to mythic 
times, but no doubt expressing 
Plato’s opinion as to his own): 
all in substantial agreement 
with the author of the speech 
against Aristogiton. On the 
other hand there was, as Boeckh 
putsit,a ‘customary assumption’ 
in the absence of exact data that 
the number of citizens was half 
as much again, or about 30,000. 
For this he quotes Herodotus 
v. 97 where the statement is 
put into the mouth of Arista- 
goras who, however, had a 
motive for exaggeration; Aris- 
toph. Eccl. 1132, a comic pas- 
sage to which there is a set-off 
in Wasps 709 dvo wupidde: and 
Pseudo-Plat. Axiochus 369 a, 
where the whole 30,000 are 
ridiculously represented as all 
present together at the condem- 
nation of the six generals (rpic- 
puplov éxxdynovafovrwv). 
TocOUTOUS TapacKevdoat xpy- 
orovs] xpnorods is attributive: 
‘to make so many persons ho- 
nest,’ not ‘so many honest 
men.’ The sense approaches 
that of cwdpovifev, to bring a 


person to a sense of his situa- 
tion, read him a useful lesson. 

§ 36. twév olzep elciv airio] 
The class of professional poli- 
ticians, comp. §§ 38, 67, 74. 

T@ yap éorw bvecdos el... uy AG- 
Bo] For the interchange of 
the indicative, expressing fact 
or certainty, with the optative 
expressing hypothesis or mere 
probability, see Jelf, Synt. $802, 
6, Madvig, Synt. § 130, or a 
note on Protag. 3354. Here 
the refusal of the crown, though 
it has actually happened, is put 
as a supposed case (u7 AdBor) ; 
but the stigma follows from the 
refusal as a necessary conse- 
quence (écrw). In Goodwin,. 
Moods and Tenses, § 70, 2, it is 
remarked that the indicative 
and optative in such cases seem 
to be interchanged without ap- 
parent reason. 

ovdevl...ro0 ypddovros] The 
Greeks say indifferently dvedos 
Twos and dvedos tivi, and the 
love of variety so characteristic 
of Greek style accounts for the 
change of construction here. 

Bovdo.ro] Naturally follows 
the mood of AdBa. We might 
take ypddovros, &c., as imper- 
fect participles, ‘used to move 


_decrees:’ but the former is, I 


think, preferable. 


P, 605.] 


ITAPANOMON. 


43 


Anv’ Sid yap TovTovs avakia Tov orehavwOjvas 


37 BeBovrevKev. ov pnv GAN et Kal Ta padioTa Ta4- 


ons of 6 aywr Tis Bovdjs, bom cupdhéper parrov 


c¢ an a x \ / 
vpiy KaTayvovow pn Ocacacbe. 


b] > / 
el bev amroyve- 


oeobe, émi Tois Néyovat TO BovreuvTpLov éatar, éav dé 
al / / 
KatTayvere, él Tois OumTais’ EopaKoTes yap oi ToA- 
\ \ \ mn / / / > b] 
dot dud THY TaV AEYOvTwY Trovnplay THVS adypn- 


pévny thy Bovdjv tov stépavov, ovy) mponcovtat 605 


, \ \ Us nA 
TovTols Tas Tpakes, GANA Ta BédXTiCT <povow av- 


dia yap rTovrovs] ‘It was 
owing to these men (A. and his 
associates) that the administra- 
tion of the senate has not been 
worthy of a crown.’ 
kev, 8C. 7 BovAy, as in § 16. 

§ 37. od um adda] ‘Not 
but that,’ is here somewhat 
unusually followed by an im- 
perative Oedcacbe. The orator 
probably had in his mind ov 
bn Gd paddov cuudéper, then 
altered the expression to the 
more Vivid daw maddov cuudéper 
Oedoacbe. K. translates ‘how- 
ever.” 

karayvodo.] For the parti- 
ciple with cupdépew, Schaefer 
compares Herod. vir. 87, éd0c¢é 
oi réd€ Troijoa, Td Kal cuviverKe 
mownodoyn. Add Soph. Oed. Tyr. 
316 gdpovety ws Sewdv %0a un 
Térn | Wer dpovovyrr.. Lys. Or. 
25 § 27, ofs ovdé dak édvorré- 
Anoe weOouévors. [Plat.] 1. Alcib. 
113 D, cxorotcw ordrepa cuvolcec 
mpodéacw, and again, rodXols 5) 
éd\voitédnoev adikjoace péyada 
aduxcjpara. (From Jelf, Synt., 
§ 691, who however, is not hap- 
py in his explanation.) In this 
class of phrases the participle 
is more forcible than the infini- 
tive: as Stein well puts it in 
his note on the passage in He- 
rodotus, it expresses the reflex 


BeBovreu- | 


action (Doppelwirkung) of the 
deed when done: in the present 
instance, not merely, ‘itis your 
interest to condemn’ (xarayvi- 
vat), but ‘when you have con- 
demned (xarayvoiow) you will 
reap the benefit of it.’ The low 
moral tone of the passage shows 
us Demosth. at his worst: the 
jury who sit to dispense justice 
are openly invited to give a ver- 
dict in accordance with interest. 
It is rpdyua pddcov (below, § 42). 

éml tots liuwras] ‘It (the 
senate-house) will be ruled by 
the ordinary (or ‘ silent’) mem- 
bers, opposed to oi Néyorres, of 
pyropes. In de Fals, Leg. p. 346, 


' § 17=19, 7d yap BovdeuvThpiov 


peotov jv ldiwwrwv, they are)( 
Bovreuvral, and Shilleto quotes 
Aeschin, Ctes. § 125, peracrn- 
cduevos tovs ldiwras, ‘having 
ordered strangers to withdraw.’ 
Another usage of lduwérns was 
noticed above on § 25. Again, 
in Nicostr. p. 1247, § 2, it is 
‘the individual,’ as distinguish- 
ed from the state. 

Mpohrovrat Toros Tas mpdéers | 
Comp. F. L. p. 391 § 161= 
178, ra év Opdkyn mpoemévor, 
‘leaving matters in Thrace to 
take their course.’ Another 
sense of mpolecOa, common in 
Demosthenes, is to ‘risk or lend’ 


44 


/ 

TOL. 

J b 
EOTNKOT@V 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS. [8$ 37—39. 


> O\ , A \ a nN! \ 

et S& yernoetas TodTO Kal Tdv HOadwv Kal cvr- 
pNTOpwyv amadrayncecbe, drvrecOe, 

” > a , a an , r . 
avdpes “AOnvaiot, wav? & rpoonKer yuyvomeva. — 


tri} 
WOT 


et undevos adXov Evexa, Sia TadTa Katandioréov. 
a / od al \ a ¢ cal > 
O toivuy Erepov Set pu) Aadetv vuas, dxovoare. 
’ , al n n 
icws avaBnoetat Kal cvvepet TH BovrH Pirstriros Kal 
> / a > \ fe ” ivf 
Avtuyevns Kal 0 avtuypadeds Kai tives GdXo1, otzrep 


b rapeornxérwv Z Bens, cum =TOstv. 


money, the hazardous nature 
of ancient commerce suggesting 
the notion of ‘ throwingit away.’ 
So pro Phorm. p. $46 § 6, rods 
d\Xous xpnoras ols mpoeiuévos Hv. 
Dionysodor. §§ 2, 48, 50. 

Tov HOdiwy rat owes rnKsrey 
pnropwv|] If this reading is 
right, the meaning will be ‘ the 
old confederacy of orators’ as 
R. W. translates: cvveor. ‘band- 
ed together.’ There is, however, 
good MS. authority for mape- 
ornkérwy, nearly = rapivTwr, 
‘the old set of orators always 
on the spot’ (bei der Hande, 
Benseler): and this I rather 
prefer. Thus early in his career, 
Demosthenes is already in mark- 
ed opposition to ‘the other ora- 
tors.’—70ds is the only form in 
poetry, é0as more usual in prose: 
see Shilleto on Thucyd. 1. 44 
§ 3, where he has not failed to 
notice the double reading of = 
in the present passage. 

§§ 38—41. The speaker now 
passes from Androtion’s pre- 
sumed defence of himself to the 
pleas which others may be ex- 
pected to urge in his behalf. 
And first, 

§§ 38, 39. Those who, as lead- 
ing members of the senate now 
under censure, or as auditors of 
the public accounts, are respon- 
sible for the loss by embezzle- 
ment, will no doubt speak in 


favour of Androtion and of the 
senate. But it is themselves that 
they will really be defending. 
If you acquit him, you will be 
granting an indemnity to all his 
accomplices; you will never be 
able to bring any one of them to 
justice, Resent their interference 
as that of men who are trying to 
deceive you in their own in- 
terest. 

§ 38. dvaBjoerar Kal cuvepe?] 
‘Will mount the Bema and 
plead the cause of the senate:’ 
the verb as usual agreeing with 
the nearest subject idcurzos 
though ries dAXou are included. 
The present of cuvepe? is cuva- 
yopevw (de Rhod. Lib. p. 194 
§ 15, Polyel. p-. 1207 § 6), or 
ovvyyopS (de Cor. Trierarch. 
p. 1232 § 16, 1233 § 18), agree- 
ably to the rule laid down by 
Cobet, Var. Lect. pp. 35—39. 
Compare his Nov. Lect. p. 778, 
Sandys on Demosth. Callicles, 
p. 1273 § 4.—Nothing is known 
of the men here mentioned, 

6 avrvypageds] The short ac- 
count of the avrvypadets, check- 
ing-clerks,  contrarotulatores, 
contréleurs, in Dict. Antiq. s.v. 
Grammateus, may be supple- 
mented by some additional par- 
ticulars from Caillémer’s ar- 
ticle ‘ Antigrapheis’ in Darem- 
berg and Saglio. 

It seems to have been a rule 


P. 605.] 


TIAPANOMON. 45 


éxel Su’ EavTav elyov peta TovTov Td BovrcuTHpLov 
Kal ToUTwY THY KaKOY ciow aitiot. Set dn TavtTas 
Upas yuyvdcKew OTL ToUTOLs éotl ev 7) Tpdhacis THs 
auvnyopias TH BovrAn BonGeiv, ri S adnOeia vrrép av- 
TOV aywviodvTat Kal TOV evOuVaY, ds avTovs MpoonKes 


a a / 
39 Sodvar TOV TeTpayyévan. 


Yy \ a \ 
Exel YAP OVUTMS. AV MEV 


b] n \ \ / ¢/ / > > 
aATOYVOTE THY ypadny TAVTHY, aTayTES Elowv aTnAXa- 


in all Athenian finance, muni- 
cipal and national, that where- 
ever there was a raulas, dis- 
penser, treasurer, or paymaster, 
there was by his side an av7t- 
ypapeds to check his expendi- 
ture. Thus it is proved by in- 
scriptions that there was an 
dyrvypageds to each deme: and 
a general in the field disposed 
of his own military chest sub- 
ject to a like control (Demosth. 
de Chers. p. 101 § 47, where, 
however, the word dvriypagpeds 
does not occur), Of the two 
chief officers who bore this 
name, the avriypaded’s Tijs diot- 
khoews attached to the principal 
finance minister (see on Lycur- 
gus, above § 35n.), and the 
dvtiypapeds THs BovAns, the lat- 
ter must here be meant. I find 
it impossible to agree with 
Boeckh (P. E. bk. 1. note 162), 
that Harpocration is mistaken, 
and that the present passage 
relates to subordinate checking- 
clerks ; or that there were three 
principal dvrvypadets as Boeckh 
also states (P. H. p. 186), on 
the authority of Suidas, who 
has confounded the dvrvypadevs 
with the ypaumareds, or secre- 
tary of the senate, who prefixed 
his name to its decrees: or that 
there was only one, as Schoe- 
mann seems to hold in his 
latest work (Antig. p.378, note 
4). It seems clear that the 


dvrvypapeds was distinguished 
from the ypaymare’s, by check- 
ing financial matters only, not 
proceedings generally : and that 
Harpocration is right when he 
says, quoting good authorities: 
Airrol 6é joav avrvypadets, 6 ev 
THs Sioixncews, Ws Pyotr Piidxopos, 
0 6¢ THs Bouvdns, ws "Apicrorédns 
év "AOnvaiwy mondirela. 

olrep éxei—rd BovdevTHptov] 
‘Who then with the defendant 
used to manage the senate- 
house,’ It is agreed that éxe? here 
=Tére, a sense of which I can- 
not find another undoubted ex- 
ample: Soph, Philoct. 395, and 
Eurip. Ion, 546, 554, have been 
quoted, but all three passages 
may be explained otherwise: see 
Mr Paley’s notes on each. ‘ éxeZ 
kat éml xpdvou Tdcoer Oa, docetur 
Anecd, Bekk, p. 188, init,’ 
G. H. Schaefer.—Demosth. says 
several times &’ éavrod éyewv 
for ‘to hold in one’s hands:’ 
Funkhaenel adduces de Rhod. 
Lib. p.194 § 14, 60 airdv efxov 
tiv wodw. Olympiod. p. 1171, 
§ 15, 7d dpyvpiov r0d0’ Grav elxev 
avros 6: éavrod 6 dvOpwios. de 
Cor. Trierarch. p.1234 § 22, ap- 
Ta 60 abrdv roodyra (not to be 
construed as if it were rootcw). 

§ 39. dv perv adroyvare] 
Here, to ‘dismiss’ the impeach- 
ment, T7v ypapyv: more usually 
to ‘acquit’ the defendant; ‘ce. 
genit. pers. like xarayiyvaoxew. 


46 


40 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS. [8§ 39—42. 


\ 
yeévor Kal Sixnv ovdels ovdepiav pr) dd°* tis yap ér 
av xcataynpicacto éxelvav, THY Bovdjv udv éoreda- 
t ® \ pS a 

VOKOT@V, hs OvTOL Tpoéctacay ; édyv Sé KaTayveTe, 
mMp@rov mev TA evopKa eoerD endicpévor, eit él 
tais evOvvais Exactov tovTwv NapwBavovtes, ds pmev 
av tpiv adicetv Soxh, KoNdceTe, ds & dv pn), TOT’ ady- 
CETE. pn OV ws UTép THs BovATS AeyovT@Y Kal TaOV 

a > ’ > ’ € id \ e fal / 
TONK@V AKOVETE, GAN WS UTEP AVTAY TapaKpovope- 


vous opyiverbe. 


"Ere tour “Apyiav oiuat tov Xonapyéa (Kal yap 
ovtos éBovnNeve épuact) ws emrverkh Senoec Oar Kal cvv- 


Compare [Demosth.] Theocrin. 
p. 1827 § 17, od Kadds éyxa Tav- 
TH amoyryvucKkew Ty évdercéw: 
on the other hand, droyrvava 
Ths dikns, ¢.. Phorm. p. 913 
§ 22, p. 920 § 45, Anecd. Bekk. 
p. 183, 24: ’Amoyryvwoxew* adei- 
vat Tov éyKAnUaTwr. 

kohdcere] The active form, 
as always in the Orators; xodd- 
gouae Xenophon, Plato: contr. 
KoAGuat, apparently only in 
Aristophanes. “The quotations 
of fut. act. will show that Hem- 
sterhuis and Porson were quite 
wrong in asserting that ‘the 
Attics use only the mid. fut. 
of this verb,’ and that Butt- 
mann, Passow, and even Poppo 
are scarcely right in calling the 
mid, fut. ‘usitatior.’” Veitch, 
8. V. 

kat Tav mo\\av] Of course to 
be joined with vrép rijs Bovdns: 
et populi, as Jerome Wolf and 
Kennedy; rather than maximae 


partis senatus, as Jurinus, 
Funkhaenel, Dindorf. 
§s 40, 41, Archias also, a 


member of last year’s senate, 
who poses as an honest man, will 
probably intercede for Androtion. 


But you can ask him a few per- 
tinent questions. If he justifies 
the conduct of the senate, what 
becomes of his character for ho- 
nesty ? if his advice was not lis- 
tened to, what can he say for his 
colleagues? if he held his tongue, 
he connived at their proceed- 
ings. 

§ 40. rov Xodapyéa] His 
deme was Xd\apyos or Xodap- 
yia, of the tribe Acamantis. 
The names of the demotae occur 
much oftener than those of the 
demes, both in authors and in- 
scriptions: hence there is often 
an uncertainty about the latter. 

érveck| In Demosth. ‘honest, 
well-principled, respectable,’ c. 
Phorm. p. 915 § 30 wy’ émceckeis 
doxwow elva mepl Ta cuuBdraua, 
Lacrit. p- 925 § 7 olduevos elvar 
€mveckets dy Opwirrous kal oto ep 
T po erouovyTo Kat paca elvac: 
in both these instances of com- 
mercial honesty. Theocrin. p. 
1343 § 66 émvek7 Sdéav exw ére- 
AeUTnoev of general respectabi- 
lity. In Plato still more inde- 
terminate, simply =aya0os, as I 
have noted on Protag. 336 p. 
Ady. émiexws ‘tolerably,’ both 


p. 606.] TIAPANOMON. 





epely avtois. eyo 8 olpat Sev? ddL f + 
"Apxiov, épatdv avtov Tatra, & Katnydp <q ORS 
a Som a tal x —— 
Bovdijs, worep avtT@ Soxet nad@s éxew 7) KaKas’ 
Kav pev on Kad@s, pynKéTL TOV vodVv ws érrLEetKEt 606 
mpocéxyew, av dé Kakas, Ti On) TadT cia daoKov 
eTLELKNS Elval, TAAL aUTOV épwrdte. Kav péev év- 
/ bé tal > b] n / 7 
avtia réyew 7, pndéva & avTe welOecOar, dromrov 
/ n / ¢€ \ a \ Ui > \ 
Syntrov viv héeyew virép THs Ta BéXTLcTA ovy! TretOo- 
al A 6 x \ n lal a 
pévns Eavt@ BovrAns* av dé ciwTdav, was ovK ad.Kel, 
ei Tapov éEawaptavew péddovTas atroTpéTrELy TOdTO 
\ p) 2 / PE ONY t a ¢ a \ 
pev ovK érroler, viv Oé Eye TOAUG Os Sel Tods 
TOTAUTA Kaka Eipyacpévous oTehavadcat ; 
I] an 
Oiuat tolvuy avtov ovd éxeivav adbéEer Oat tav 
7 a > > a 
oyov, OTe TadtTa TavT avT@ bia Tas eiompakers 
\ ¢ ec n nr 
yéyovev, as virép vuav orlyous eiompd—ar dyoet 
\ / th tal > / : \ , 
TOMA XpHpaT avaidas ov TUévTas. Kal KaTnYyopN- 
© add vyas Z Bekk, 


in Plato and the Orators, Shil- 
leto, de F. L. p. 450 § 340= 
392. 

defy wWSl ws axovew ’Apxlov] 
‘You ought, I think, when you 
hear Archias, to do’ something 
of this sort.’ Dindorf and Ben- 
seler here follow = in omitting 
duds, which even the Zurich 
editors retain. 

épwray...épwrare] The con- 
struction changed for the sake 
of variety: see above § 36. The 
argument is ingenious but so- 
phistical: the charges against 
the senate (& xarnydpnra tijs 
BovAjjs) are assumed as proved. 

§ 41. évavria déyew] Of 
course an imperfect infinitive, 
though Funkhaenel goes out of 
his way to deny the fact: ef. 
§ 25. The reading dyriéyev 
has slight MS. authority, but is 
preferred by Cobet, Nov. Lect. 


p- 523, and is certainly neater, 
MENANTIAETEIN passes ea- 
sily into MENENANTIAAE- . 
TEIN. 

§§ 42—46. As a last argu- 
ment, Androtion will represent 
himself as a martyr to public 
spirit. He had charged himself 
with the unpopular task of col- 
lecting arrears of property tax: 
hence all this has come upon 
him. If you convict him, he 
will argue, nobody who does not 
like it need pay taxes at all. 
But reflect, first, that this is not 
the question which you are 
sworn to try: and secondly, that 
the paltry amount of seven ta- 
lents that he has recovered for 
you is nothing compared with 
the question whether the laws 
are to be in force. 

§42. édlyous... odd xpnuara] 
éXlyous, for which Jerome Wolf 


43 


44 


48 KATA ANAPOTIONOS _ [8§ 43—45. 


S U 
cel TOUTMY, TPayya Padiov, oipat, StaTrpaEdpevos, 
\ n 
Tov 4) TIWévT@Y Tas elodopas, Kal dnoe Tacav 
fal \ 
aderav écecOar Tod py TiOévar Tas eiodopds, ef 
a a ¢ a ? > lj > 
Katatndicicbe avtod". tyueis 5, & dvdpes *AOn- 
a A lal a ’ 
vaiot, mp@Tov pév exeivo évOupeiobe, Ste ov Tepi 
\ \ 
TOUT@Y SUKATELY OMOMOKATE, GAN el KATA TOUS Vd- 
fous TO Whdiopa eirev, 6lO OTL Tavdewov éoTt, 
¢ 3 “ / \ / 
KaTnyoplav Trotovpevoy Ws adsKoval TLVes THY TOAD, 
o.+%4 : | n e > lal / 7 \ a 
avtTov akwdv ov adixet peSovev dvTwv pr Sodvas 
/ \ \ , ays > FFL 
Sienv’ word yap Sy mou petfov éot adixnua ypadew 
Tapa Tovs vomous 7) THY eLapopay pr) TLOevar. OTL 
Toivuv ovo 6 havepas Eweddev ANOVTOS TOUTOU pdels 
’ , > 9 , > r 209 “ 
ciaoice pend eOednoew cloTpaTTeElV, ovd ovTwS 
> , > A § , f) Coan \ \ 
admowndictéov, é« Tavde ydoerOe. vpiv Tapa Tas 
> \ ‘ Ee oN Limes / 
eiahopas tas amd Navowixou, wap’ icws tadavta 


4 xarapnguetobe avtov Z. Karayndretc@’ avrod Bens. 


proposed évlous, is not said in 
disparagement of A.’s services, 
as G. H. Schaefer imagined: 
for Benseler rightly points out 


’ that the words are put into his 


own mouth (¢jcer). The argu- 
ment that a few rich and un- 
scrupulous men were notasham- 
ed to withhold large sums due 
to the public, and to persecute 
him for compelling them to 
disgorge, A. thought likely to 
weigh with an Athenian jury, 


always ready to suspect oli- 


garchical insolence. Hence also 
mparyua pad.ov. 

yp eR Dobree cor- 
rects damparrouevos and brackets 
Trav ph TUOevTwy Tas elodopds. 
Cobet, who approves of both 
changes, remarks on Dindorf’s 
neglect of Dobree, ‘quo nemo 
melior Demostheni interpres et 
emendator obtigit.’? Dobree is, 
of course, a man after Cobet’s 


own heart as a contemner of 
the MSS.: but in the present 
case I believe them to be right. 

ddevav...rod pn Tiévac] ‘im- 
punity for non-payment’ of the 
property-tax. In Timocr. § 31 
ddevov Tov wy Te wader andes 7 
dewor there is a different shade 
of meaning; ddeca is referred to 
the penalty, not the offence, 
‘exemption from unpleasant or 
serious consequences.’ For the 
legal sense of Gdeva, ‘a vote of 
the people promising indem- 
nity,’ see Dict. Antigq. s. v. 

§ 43. mavdevor... karnyoplay 
movovmevov...avTov aéovr] ‘it is 
monstrous in one who complains 
of others wronging the state to 
expect to escape punishment 
himself,’ 

§ 44. mapa rds elodopas ras 
amd Navowixov] ‘Upon all the 
[property] taxes from the time 
of Nausinicus,’ K, rightly. Ilapa 


45 


P. 607.] 


IIAPANOMON. 


49 


TPLaAKOTLAa 1) pLKP@ THElw, Ereipa® TétTapa Kai 


/ > \ / bf .¢ \ 
déxka éotl TaXavtTa, oY ExTa 


d¢ TiOnus aravTa. 
n 


f{ .? SL P a) UN 
OUTOS eloempatev, yo 


oe \ \ \ ee , 
éml pev 6) Tovs ExdvTas TLOévTAS 


ov deicbe “Avdpotiwvos, émi dé Tovs édXelrorTas. 


” a / A 
éott Tolvuy Uuly vuvi oKETTEéoV Ef TOoTOUTOU Timacbe 
\ / 
THY ToNTELaY Kal TOUS KELMLEVOUS VOsoUS Kal TO 
b] Cee > \ ’ al / a / 
evopKkeiy’ ef yap atrowndiciobe TovToOv dhavepas olTw 


© é\A\elupara Z Bens. cum libris praeter k. 
_f éra rddavta Z Bens. cum =TQkrs. 


expresses proportion,—‘ accord- 
ing to,’ Jelf § 636, iii. k. quot- 
ing Lept. p. 467 § 32 wapd ras 
TpidxovTa pupiddas dldwow vdpiv 
puplovs pediuvous, ‘on every 
300,000 bushels gives you 
10,000.’ [Demosth.] Erot. p. 
1402 § 4 mapa rods xpwyuévous 7d 
wreistrov Siaddarrévrwy, ‘(cir- 
cumstances) differing according 
to the use made of them.’ Thu- 
eyd. vir. 29. 2 mapa mévre vais 
is however wrongly referred to 
this head, and translated ‘for 
every five ships’; the meaning 
is within five ships, i.e. allow- 
ing pay for five ships over, 60 
when there were really only 55. 
(Classen’s acute handling of this 
difficult passage is well worth 
study.) 

The archonship of Nausinicus 
falls B.c. 378—7 (the Athenian 
year beginning in July) at the 
breaking out of the war called 
in § 15 ‘the last war with the La- 
cedaemonians.’ The elapopa was 
then remodelled and the cvpmo- 
plat introduced for the first time. 
Boeckh treats this subject at 


great length in P. E. book rv. 


chs. vii.—ix.: the results are 
given more clearly, as well as 


concisely, in Dict. Antig. 8.Vv. 


Hisphora. Compare also Grote 
ch. 77 (vit. p. 100 ff.). Schoe- 
mann, Antig. p. 457 f. The 


W. D. 


present passage is discussed by 
Grote, in opposition to Boeckh, 
in an excellent note (v1r. p. 102 
ed. 1862). Boeckh thought 
that the whole 300 talents here 
mentioned were levied in the 
single year of Nausinicus’ ar- 
chonship: this looks, as Grote 
observes, as if he adopted the 
reading éa it Navowvixouv (Taylor’s 
conjecture, approved by Reiske). 
Grote on the other hand gives 
good reasons for his opinion 
that ‘a total sum of 300 talents 
or thereabouts, had been levied 
(or called for) by all the various 
property taxes imposed from the 
archonship of Nausinicus down 
to the date of the speech,’ a 
period of about 23 years. This, 
it must be added, is the only 
admissible rendering of dé. 

éya@ 5é rlOnut aravra] ‘I will 
assume however that he levied 
the whole.’ In Timoer. § 162, 
where the argument is precisely 
similar, the amount of arrears 
collected by Androtion and his 
associates (ovro:, including Ti- 
mocrates himself) is reduced to 
five talents. 

§ 45. ef rocotrov Timaicbe] 
‘Whether you value the consti- 
tution and the established laws 
and the observance of your oaths 
at this (miserable) price of 7 or 
even 14 talents.’ 


vs 


607 


50 KATA ANAPOTIONOS _ [8§ 45—47. 


\ t U n 
mapa TOvS vouous eipnKoTos, SokeTE TaaL TA YpHuaTa 
n \ “ a n 
TadTa avTt TOV voMwv Kat THs evopKias ypHnobat. 
my 3090~—COA > D2 Lal / ¢ a a v 
a ovd ay ei Tap éavTod Soin Tis vpiv, NaBeiv a£Evor, 
/ >4? z c; 2 7 
46 un Ti ye €f @ Etépovs elompdttev. Bcf OdtaP 
a / a vA 
TadTa réyn, wéwvnoOe TOV OpKav Kal THY ypadny év- 
a f ral 
Oupciobe, OTL vov ov Tept mpadkews eiohopaer éoTiv, 
> a / ‘ ‘ 
GX ei Se? Kupiovs eivar Tovs vopovs. Kal Tepl 
, . \ \ € al la) 
TOUT@Y jéeV, OV TPOTOV Vas aTayayov ato TOD 
U ¢ la) 
vomov TapaxpoverOat Entnoe, Kal & mpds TadP” 


a ovd’ dv ci] i.e, & odd ay 
aivov (etn) NaBetv, ef k.7.X. An 
elliptical construction common 
with xdy ei, domep dy ef. Comp. 
on Protag. 328 a. 

map’ éavrod] ‘out of his own 
pocket’ (§ 48), an allusion to the 
émidéces Or voluntary contribu- 
tions with which the necessities 
of the state were met in times of 
pressure. For these see Boeckh, 
P. E. book iv. ch. 17, or Dict. 
Antiq. s. v. Epidoseis, where 
examples are given. The most 
- striking instance is perhaps that 
of Demosthenes himself, who 
besides other liturgies (like the 
choregia well known through 
the Speech against Midias) ‘gave 
on different occasions three tri- 
remes, and also at one time eight 
talents, to which he afterwards 
added three more for the build- 
ing of the walls, one talent after 
the battle of Chaeroneia, and 
another for the purchase of 
corn.’ Boeckh, p. 587. Besides 
this, his ransoming of Athenian 
prisoners in Macedonia is no- 
ticed with complacency by him- 
self, de Fals. Leg. p. 394 §§ 169, 
170 (=186, 187 R. 8.): with 
ridicule by Aeschines, de F. L, 
§ 100. 

ph th ye] Se. ef doln, ‘much 
less, assuredly, on condition of 


collecting it from others.’ For 
this use of uy 71, generally fol- 
lowed by ye and often also by 
5n, see Jelf Synt. § 762, Madvig 
Synt. § 212. The principle is 
the same as that of o’>x .d71, uy 
bri, i.e. oF Aéyw Gre, my Eye 
(Aéyewv) 674. The phrase recurs 
§ 53 extr. de F. L. p. 383 § 137 
=150. 

§ 46. «epi mpdiews elopopdr] 
‘the question is not about the 
exaction of property taxes,’ for 
which he used elompaits, eo- 
mpatrew above. So ina ovyypa- 
oy or agreement ap. Demosth. 
Lacrit. p. 926 § 12 éorw 9 mpaéis 
Tots Saveicacr ‘it shall be lawful 
forthe lenders to levy the amount 
by execution :’ Dionysodor. p. 
1296 § 45 ry 5é wpGéw civar Kal 
é& évds kal é& duqoiv, ‘the bor- 
rowers shall be jointly and se- 
verally liable.’ 

amd Tod véuov] The law ‘de 
senatucoronando:’ Funkhaenel, 
Benseler. 

apos Tav’] ‘in reply to this:" 
‘when he urges these points,’ 
R.W. 

§§ 47—78. Second main divi- 
sion of the speech. Androtion’s 
assumed line of defence has now 
been disposed of, and the orator 
proceeds to an arraignment of 
his whole political career. Al- 


Pp. 607] IITAPANOMON., 51 


a Ul / 
Upuas MVNmovevovTas pr) emriTpérreLy TpoonKel, TONKA 
/ yo - ” agp ¢ ‘= / 27 
Aéyew yan Ett, Kal TAadP ixava civat vouilwr, Ear. 
\ a 
47  Bovropas dé kal ta Twodtevpata éEeTacat Tod 
n > n / ’ e > BA . 4 ol 
Karod Kaya0o0d Tovtov, ds ov ovK eof 6 TL THY 
A , 
Sewvotatwv édAdTav® havyncetas’ Kal ydp avaid) 
/ 
kal Opacdy Kal KrXérrTHV Kal UTrEepydavoy Kal TavTa 
a / 
parrov 7 év Snpoxpatia mroditevecOat érutHdecov 
Pie’ aiei nas Ral h \ A \. 24)? @ , 
dvTt avtov delEw", Kal mpa@Ttov per, eb @ péytoTov 


dpovel, THv THY YpnuaTwov eiotpatw eEeTaowpev 


& é\\elrwv Z Bekk. Bens. cum =FYTOQsty. 


h grodelEw Z Bekk. cum Frt. 


most the whole of these sections 
is repeated in the Timocrates: 
and they fall naturally into two 
subordinate divisions. (i) The 


collection of arrears due to the . 


state, for which he takes credit 
as a public benefactor, was really 
a display of brutality and dis- 
honesty worthy of the worst 
times of oligarchical oppression 
(§§ 47—68); (ii) and the rest of 
his acts are of a piece with it, 
especially his treatment of the 
sacred utensils. By melting 
down the golden crowns pre- 
sented to the state, and recasting 
them as paterae or cups, he not 
only obliterated inscriptions 
commemorative of the glories 
of Athens, and the gratitude of 
our allies, but opened the door 
to the grossest fraud and waste 
of the precious metal (§§ 69— 
78). 

i 47—50, I will prove him 
to have stopped short of nothing 
that is atrocious: that by his 
shameless robberies and his over- 
bearing conduct he is anything 
but fit to be a statesman in a de- 
mocracy. Witness his treatment 
of Euctemon, whom he falsely 
accused of retaining balances due 


to you, got you to depose him from 
the office of collector to which he 
had been chosen by lot, and crept 
into his place—with what object 
you will soon see. 

§ 47. ra rodtrevuara—rovrou] 
‘to examine the political conduct 
of this worthy fellow’ K. or ‘hon- 
ourable man,’ xadds kaya0ds as in 
§ 32. It has been remarked (on 
§ 23) that cross-examination was 
little known at Athens: hence, 
probably, the free resort to the 
diaBoryn TOU mpoowmrov as the 
Scholiast' calls it, or abuse of 
the other side. Cicero’s in- 
vectives against Gabinius and 
Piso, the consuls who allowed 
him to be banished, are well- 
known examples of the Roman 
license in public speaking. Com- 
pared with ‘cross-examination 
to character,’ pushed to the 
lengths it has lately been in 
English courts, the ancient prac- 
tice may be pronounced the 
milder form of torture. 

kal mp@rov uev] This passage, 
ending with els 76 decuwriprov 
€\xecOa in the middle of § 56, 
is repeated with a few verbal 
alterations in Timocr. §§ 160— 
168, 


4—2 


52 


KATA: ANAPOTIONOS __ [8§ 47, 48. 


2 A \ A s , 5) \ 
avTov, &) TH TovTov mpocéyovtes adalovela Tov 
fal bd \ \ a b / lal Rl / 
vouv, AAA TO TPaypa, olov yéyove TH adnOeia, oKo- 
a \ 
movvtes. odToS Kvetnuova pjcas Tas vuetépas exe 
> \ \ ek a |} , x\ 2 pe an 
etoghopas, kal TovTt é&edeyEeuw 7) wap éavtod Kata- 


Oncew vTrocyopevos', Katadvcas >ndicpate Krn- 608 


i Jrooxdpuevos om. Zeum pr. =. Ita Cob. Misc. Crit. pp. 524, 531. 


§ 48. sap’ éavrod carabjcew] 
An appeal to the cupidity of his 


hearers which was not likely to © 


fail of its object, especially in 
those times. With all their dread 
of guxodayria, and hatred of 
the person of the informer, the 
Athenians were ready to listen 
to any proposal which promised 
to fill the public treasury, so 
large a portion of which, under 
the forms of the d:xaorikéy, Jew- 
pexdv, and pucOds éxxAnoracrixés, 
flowed into their own pockets. 
Whether it was a charge of 
malversation against a high of- 
ficial, or of concealment of pro- 
perty to the most trifling amount 
against a state debtor of the 
poorer class, they were ready to 
receive any statement of claim 
(dmoypagy) which might lead to 
fines and confiscations, The 
speech against Nicostratus af- 
fords a good illustration of the 
latter class: cf. Dict. Antiq. 8. Vv. 
dmoypapy. The extreme severity 
of the Athenian laws against 
any usurpation of the privileges 
of a citizen by the driyo., or by 
aliens, whether févor or pérorxor, 
had a like origin. Hence also 
the jealousy with which the lists 
of its citizens were revised by 
the members of each deme. The 
strongest case on record appears 
to be that of Pyrrhus, a member 
of the noble family of the Eteo- 
butadae, who was prosecuted 
by évderécs for acting as a dicast 
when under disfranchisement, 


and actually put to death, though 
the crime was committed under 
stress of poverty (Demosth, Mid. 
p. 573 § 182). The sovereign peo- . 
ple, a democracy within itself, 
was a close corporation as re- 
garded outsiders, and ‘the fewer 
the better cheer’ was one of its 
ruling principles. Andlike many 
tyrants recorded in history, it 
treated informers as favourites 
who were to be first encouraged 
in oppression on condition of 
sharing their gains, and then 


“squeezed dry, with much show 


of virtuous indignation and the 
reality of a double profit. On 
this weak side of the Athenian 
character C. R. Kennedy has 
some good remarks, Dict. Antiq. 
s. v. Sycophantes. 

The tendency to encourage 
prosecutions was likely fo be at 
its height when the revenue was 
at its lowest: and the period of 
the 105th and 106th Olympiads 
(B.c. 360—353), within which 
this speech falls, was that of the 
greatest impoverishment of the 
Athenian treasury (Boeckh, P. 
EH, p. 435). To this period be- 
long the remodelling of the tyri- 
erarchy in 358, by which the 
smaller fry no longer escaped 
through the meshes of the fi- 
nancial net: and the law of Lep- 
tines about 357-6 (opposed, un- 
successfully as it would seem, 
by Demosthenes in his great 
speech), which for the sake of 
an insignificant increase of 


P. 608.] 


TIAPANOMON. | 53 


\ > \ re a U 
pOTHV apxny emt TH Tpohace Ta’TH ert THY elomrpa- 
L / ; 
Ew mapédv. Snunyopias 8 emi rovtous movovpevos, 
ed 6 a ; 
@s éoTl Tpl@v aipecis*, 7) Ta TouTela KaTaKOTTELY 


k add byw Bekk, cum libris praeter pr. =. 


‘ revenue abolished exemptions 
to which the public faith was 
pledged. 

karanvoas Wynplopare KANpwThv 
dpx7v] Explained already on 
76 Tap vue ddikws éxreceiv $1 n. 
The krAnpwrn apxy is that of 
éxdoyets, aS to which there is 
butlittleinformation. The word 
éx\oyevs appears to occur among 
classical writers only in a frag- 
ment of Lysias (Reiske’s Indez, 
not in L. and §.): but it is 
noticed by Harpocration and 
Suidas, and the equivalent 
phrase oi éx\éyovres occurs c. 
Timocr. §§ 40, 144, of elompdr- 
tovres CG. Polycl. p. 1209 § 10. 
The éxdoye?s are probably to be 
distinguished from the dé:aypa- 
gets, who kept the lists analo- 
gous to our rate-books; and 
from the érvypade?s or assessors 
(if the latter name was not rather 
confined to the tribute from the 
allies, and had nothing to do 
with internal taxation). It ap- 
pears from the grammarians 
that there were various kinds of 
éxdoyeis or collectors: (1) extra- 
ordinary, appointed when the 
tribute (pdpos) fell into arrears, 
to supplement the action of the 
Hellenotamiae, its regular admi- 
nistrators : these weretaken from 
the richer classes, and could not, 
therefore, have been a xAnpwrn 
apxyn (Boeckh, P. HE: p. 156-7): 
(2) ordinary, who collected the 
elaopopa under the tyeudves Tov 
cunpopiay (Westermann = ap. 
Pauly, s. v. éxdoyets). It was 
doubtless an office of the latter 
class, open to all fully enfran- 


chised citizens by lot, without 
reference to the amount of their 
property, that Euctemon held. 

It is impossible not to agree 
with Prof. Mahaffy (Social Life 
in Greece, passim) as to the 
proneness of the Greeks, not ex- 
cepting the Athenians, to dis- 
honesty and especially to the 
embezzlement of public money: 
see further, notes on Timoer. 
§§ 79, 193. In the absence of 
property qualification implied 
by a kAnpwr7 apx7 the safeguards 
against this were (1) as in mo- 
dern times, the giving of se- 
curity: ol éyyvduevor are joined 
with oi éxXéyovres Timocr. ll. ce.: 
(2) the readiness of the Athe- 
nians to inflict capital punish- 
ment for slight offences against 
property, not tempered (as in 
England in the early part of the 
present century) by any reluct- 
ance on the part of juries to 
convict. 

mapésv] So de Cor. p. 252 
§ 79 éxeivos eis IeNordyynoov 
mapedtero, Philip ‘ was trying to 
creep into the Peloponnese,’ 
establish a footing there. Aes- 
chin. Ctes. § 37 rovotrov &6os 
mapadéduxev els TH vudy mode ° 
Telav, 

tpiav atpeois} The ‘three 
courses’ offered by Androtion 
to the choice of the Athenians 
are to break up (and melt down) 
the sacred plate, to have a new 
elcgopd, or to demand payment 
of those in arrear. With rods 
égeldovras supply ras elogopas 
understood from eicg¢épew: the 
double accusative is expressed 


54 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§§ 48—52. 


* / > / 
n Tarw eiopépew 7 Tos opeltdovtas eiompaTrey, 


e al 
49 Gipoupévav eikdTws Uudv Tods OdpeiovTas eiompar- 


5° 


5 


Lal 


a ¢ / , \ 
Tew, Tals vToTyéoect KaTéywV, Kal did TOV KaLpOV 
“a 3 cts an ‘ , 
OS VY TOT €ywv e€ovciav, Tois MEV KELMEVOLS VOMOLS 
\ ld > al A 
TEept TOUTWY OVK MeTO Selvy ypHaOaL OVO, Et pn TOU- 
>? e \ eg , / 
Tous évopitev ikavovs, éTépous TiGéval, Whndicpata 
o Ss > cn \ \ / > *& ] , 
el7rev év viv Seva Kal Tapavopma, dv wy npyoNaBeL 
\ \ a \ 
Kal TOAAG TaV vpeTépwv KEKNOpE, TOUS EvdeKa ypa- 
> tal a 3 > 
was axodovbev pe? Eavtod. eit’ éywv TovToVs YEV 
Seah, \ al lal ee \ \ \ b] , 
él Tas TOV TOALTOY oiklas. Kai TOV pev Evxtnpova, 
“\ > , x , Ae | BA \ > \ 
ov evomrpakew 7 Kata@ncew avTos épn Tas eichopas, 
3xO\ Ss / \ / ¢ f > > / 
ovdev eiyev édéyxeww Tepl to’T@v, vywas 8 eicé- 
” > 
mTpatrev, @aoTrep ov Sia THY Kvetnpovos éyOpav ért 


Tavita €Xdv, GdAXAa Sia THY vperépav. 


in § 50.—Tlouzeia, vessels car- 
ried in the procession (sou?) 
at the Panathenaea: hence in 
§ 74 the goddess herself is said 
to have been despoiled. The 
building in which they were 
kept was called rrouzrefov : it was 
used for other purposes, c. 
Phorm, p. 918 § 39. 

This passage is enough to 
prove, if other proof were want- 
ing, that the eicgopa was an ex- 
traordinary contribution levied 
at irregular intervals: it sup- 
ports, therefore, Grote’s. expla- 
nation of the rpiaxédcra rédavra 
§ 44, as against the notions that 
they were either (1) levied in one 
year or (2) spread over the 
whole 23 years. 

§ 49. rods épelovras elorpdr- 
Tew] 7d Tovs Cobet here and |i 
Timoer: 

Tais Urocxécect kaTéxwv] K. 
translates somewhat vaguely ‘as 
he had won you by his promises.’ 
karéxwy is rather ‘holding you 
down’ and so ‘ under his thumb,’ 


Kal poets 


completely in his power, ready 
to follow his dictation, much 
like 6.’ éavrav etxov § 38. 

dia Tov Karpov] ‘ because of the 
crisis,’ circumstances of the 


. time; doubtless referring to the 


Social War (see note on last 
section), 

hpyordBe . Kexdode] ‘he made 
a job for himself and has largely 
plundered you’ K, Rather‘made 
jobs.’ The imperfect expresses 
the continuous character of the 
frauds upon which A. fattened. 

Tovs &vdexa ypawas]. ‘ putting 
in a clause that the Eleven 
should accompany him’ implied 
a coercion bill of a very stringent 
character: ‘ ut qui non solveret, 
statim in vincula daretur,’ Funk- 
haenel. Cf. Dict. Antiq. s. v. 
Hendeca. 

§§ 51—55. From the case of 
Euctemon the orator passes to 
the general character of An- 


- drotion’s exactions, expanding 


the brief statement in § 47 that 
his conduct was unworthy of a 


52 


P. 608.] TIAPANOMON. | BB 


¢ / / e ’ A 
vTo\apPaveTo me rEYELY WS OV YpnY EloTpaTTeEL | 


\ ° f- an ld >] + a 
TovUs odeiiovtas. yYpnv yap. adrrAa Tas; ws 6 
, ” an 
VOMOS KEdEVEL, TOV GArAdwY EveKa’ TODTO yap éoTL 
? \ n , , n 
SnuotiKdyv. ov yap tocovtov, 6 avdpes ’AOnvaior, 
, a 
TocovT@OY xXpnuaTwV TovTOV TOV TpPOTOY cioTpa- 
/ > / a > / lal 
yGévtwv wpérycbe, ocov efnuiwabe Towottwov eOadv 
> \ / > / > \ As 2] 
eis THY TodTElav elcayouévov. ei yap éOédouT 
bd U / oe a x ¢ b 
éferdoat Tivos &vexa padrov av tis Edowto év 
/ a nx > ’ / an > ud 
Snpoxpatia Syv 7 év odvyapyia, TodT’ av evbpore 
/ , 

MpoxelpoTatov, OT’ wavTa mpactep éativ év Sypuo- 
/ ¢ \ / a ef / 5] 
Kpatia. 6Tt wev Toivuy THS Otrov Bovrecbe oru- 

/ be > , 
yapxylas ovtos aoedyéoTepos yéyove, Tapanelru. 
* 


1 é9é\er Z Bekk. Bens, 


democratic statesman. On the 
contrary it recalls the days of 
the Thirty, the worst in Athenian 
history: or rather A. surpassed 
them in brutality, and treated 
free citizens worse than slaves. 

§ 51. ds od xpyv] ‘that pay- 
ment ought not to have been ex- 
acted.’ K. omits to mark the 
tense. The speaker is obliged 
to argue that the habitual prac- 
tice of the sovereign people 
must be right in the main, how- 


ever much one may criticise it 


in detail. 
. rtév dddwv eveca] ‘for the good 
of the rest’: ‘ of the community 


in general, not of any particular 


individual who might happen to 
be interested,’ R. W. Benseler 
alone takes @\\wy as neuter, ‘on 
all other accounts.’ Cobet Misc. 
Crit. p. 524 writes: ‘Quid sit 
autem rv dd\\wv évexa neque 
intelligo neque emendare pos- 
sum,’ 

rocovTrwy xpnudtwv] Theargu- 
ment of § 45 is repeated: and 
rocovrwy is ‘such paltry sums,’ 


GéXer’ ZTOrs, 


tantula summa, G. H. Schaefer. 

§ 52. doedyécrepos] In the 
orators doedy7s, originally per- 
haps ‘ untamed’ (@é\yw), is ap- 
plied to ‘outrageous’ conduct in 
general, either in the direction 
of (1) brutality, or (2) licentious- 
ness, the usual meaning in later 
Greek, asin the N.T. For (1) 
we have Auct. tv. Phil. p. 131 
§ 2 7 mev obv doédyera kal meove- 
tla, 4 mpos G&ravras dvOpdmous 
@ikuwmos xpyra. Mid. p. 521 
§ 19 rad perv obv eis éué Kai Tods 
guréras hoedynueva of the be- 
haviour of Midiasin the theatre : 


609 


ib. p. 534 § 60 of others more | 


scrupulous than Midias das tis 
@xver THS aoedyelas TavTys abrd- 


xerp PO Hvar yuyvouevos. Hyperid. . 


pro Euxen. col. 39, 7 Pidoxparn 
Tov ‘Ayvouctov, ds Opacirara Kal 
dcenyéorara TH TronTela KexpnTaL 
For (2) 11. Olynth. p. 23 § 19 ods 
évOade ravres awh\auvov ws Todd 
tiv Oavparoroay doedyerréepous 
évras, KadXlav éxeivov tov dnpud- 
giov Kal Toovrovs dvOpurous, 
pluous yeXolww Kal mornras ail- 


56 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [S$ 52—54. 


Coe ee F. ©. cae / r / 7 
adda Tap nly mwoTe TeIoTE SewwdoTaTa 
yéyovev; éml ToY TpLdKovTa, 


b] a aN 
év TH TOAEL 
, nv 
TavTes av €lTrolre. 
/ 
éoTw OoTLS 


> a al 14 
ameatepeito TOU cwOHvat, boTis EavTOV oiKOL KpU- 


, ¢ » ° / >? \ 
TOTE TOlWVY, WS EoTLY aKoOvELV, OvdEls 


a fa) a Doe 
apetev, GANA TODTO KaTHYOpODMEY TOV TPLaKoVTA, OTE 
/ 

ovTos™ Toivuv 
, ¢ ‘ b] , 5] / an & n 
TocavTnv umepBoAnyv érroiocato éxeivwv THS aVTOD 
/ e > > / / \ 
Beerupias wor év Snpmoxpatia wodiTevopevos THV 


2Q7 > , e U / / \ 
idiav oixiavy éxaotm Secpwrtnpiov Kxaliotn, Tovs 
Ss 


Tous €k THS ayopads adixws amiyov. 


évoexa cyeov éml tas oiklas. KaiTot, @ inert "AOn- 
vatot, Ti oleaOe, O76T dvO perros mens} 1) Kal WAov- 
o10s, TOANG 8 aon hannes Kal tw lows Tpomov elxOT@S 
oUK eUTopaY apyupiov, 7) Téyos ws tods ryelrovas 


e / xa ¢€ , ¢ \ / e \ n \ ‘ 
vTepBaivor 7) VrodvolTo UO KAIVHY UITép TOD fn TO 
m ovroct Z Bekk. 


oxpav doudrwy x.7t.d. Contr. their victims not merely the © 


Phorm. p. 958 § 45 fs acedyGs 
Gere Tos amavravtas alcbdve- 
o$a. The former is evidently 
the meaning here. 

mwéte mwmore] Cobet corrects 
wére TOv wamore here and || 
Timocr. 163, comparing ib. § 16 
vou TOY momore év Uuiy TEDEVTOV 
aisxiorm Kal Sewordry. The 
constructions are not really pa- 
rallel, and the addition of the 
article does not remove, but 
introduces a harshness, 

ovdeis @otw otis ameorepetro 
Tod cwhfva] The misdeeds of 
the Thirty are here extenuated 
in order to set off those of 
Androtion. Lysias tells a dif- 
ferent tale, c. Eratosth. passim, 
and especially § 8 d:adaBdvTes 
dé ras olkias éBddifov Kal eye 
pev &évous éoriavra KxarédaBor : 
cf. c. Agerat. §§. 35—38. In 
reality, the Thirty selected for 


prominent democratic leaders, 
but any whose wealth tempted 
their rapacity. The constitu- 
tional maxim that ‘ an English- 
man’s house is his castle’ was 
perhaps more strongly asserted 
in days when the real liberties 
of the people were less secure 
than now. I am not aware 
of any other passage in the 
Orators where the same asser- 
tion is made as to the Athenian 
law. 

Too auTny UmepBornv — Bdedv- 
pias] The sense of this is plain: 
=Togolrov uvmepéBare TH avrov 
Bdedvpia Thy éxelywv. The con- 
struction has been felt as a 
difficulty, and no precisely simi- 
lar passage has been adduced: 
it may be said that éxeivwy is 
gen. after the compound of Uméep, 
Bédehuplas after the noun brep- 
Body. . 


P. 609.] ITAPANOMON. 57. 


e \ ya. A , 
Towa adovs eis TO Seopwrnpiov Exec Oat, » adda 
5] / ec / ' > > , > \ 4 
aoxynpovoin, a OovAwY, OUK éXevOépwrv éotly epya, 
\ law A td ¢ \ ipl ¢ a a A © 
Kat Tad? vio THS avTod yuvalKds Cp@To ToLaY, iv 
e 3. , bg / \ nr / / 
ws éXevOepos NYYUNTaATO Kab THS TOXEwWS TrOXITNS, 
€ r 
0 6€ TtovTwv aitios *Avdpotiwy ein, dv od dvrép 
avTov Siknv NapBavew éa Ta 4 } 
D OiKny bh a Ta Tempayyéeva kal Pe- 
i , / a» ¢€ \ a a 
54 Buwpeva, po th y vTép THs TWorews; KaiTor et TIS 
\ \ \ 
€porto” avTov, Tas eiahopas TOTEpov TA KTHMATA 7) 
\ ; 
Ta oopaTa opelrel, TA KTHWATA dHoeev av, elrep 
n , 
arn réyew BovrorTo’ amd yap TovTwY ela pépopen. 
/ : \ 
Tivos ovv évexa adels TO Ta ywpla Snuevew Kal Tas 
> 7 A 4 ’ ” \ "7 , 
olKlas Kal TADT atroypadelv, edets Kal UBpites Trori- 
i] 
tas avOpdrovs Kal Tovs TaXaiTw@pous peToiKous, ols 
¢€ , x an ~ na 
vBplotTiK@TEpoy 7) Tots OiKéTAaLs Tots TavTOU Kéypn- 


" por’ Bens. 


§ 53. 7d caua] ‘Additum mouth would be shut: he would 


est, ne ddovs sensu judiciali in- 
telligatur.’ G, H. Schaefer: i.e. 
adovs means simply ‘ caught,’ 
not ‘convicted.’ This note of 
Schaefer’s answers by antici- 
pation Cobet’s proposal to strike 
out 7d oGya. 

} G\\a doxnuovoln] ‘or com- 
‘mit other improprieties’ K. It 
is rather, ‘or be otherwise hu- 
miliated,’ seen in an undignified 
plight; not what he does, but 
the unseemliness of his situa- 
tion. 

nyyuncaro|] The distinction 
of éyyvay and éyyvac@a is 
brought out in Lex ap. De- 
mosth, 1. Steph. p. 1134 § 18 
qv dv éeyyunon éml dixalos Sa- 
papra eivac  watnp 7 ddeAdds 
duordrwp compared with ec. 
Eubul. p. 1311 § 41 éyyvarac 
6 Tarnp Ty wnrépa Thy éunv 
mapa Tod adeApov avrns. 

ov5’ vrép avrov] If he were 
driuos, as he deserves to be, his 


have no locus standi before the 
courts. 

§ 54. Snuedvew...droypadew] 
‘sequestrating lands and houses, 
and scheduling them’ [‘ seques- 


’ tering’ K. somewhat oddly for a 


lawyer]. Dict. Antiq. s.v. Apo- 
graphe, and § 48 n. 
UBpiorikwrepov 7 Tots olkérats] 
‘Even more marked than this 
abandonment of arms was the 
strong feeling about UBpis, as 
they called it, about personal 
violence, which they would not 
allow even towards slaves... 
Hence any man, whether con- 
cerned [interested ?] in the out- 
rage or not, was allowed to 
prosecute the offender.’ Ma- 
haffy’s Social Life in Greece, ed. 
3, p. 390: where further illus- 
trations are given from Aeschin, 
Timarch. § 17, Isocr. ¢. Lochit. 
(Or. 20, passim), Demosth, ¢. 
Nicostr. p. 1251 § 16, and the 
tract on the Athenian Polity 


58 


KATA ANAPOTIONO® 


[S$ 55, 56. 


55 car; Kal pny ei Oérdovte® oxélracOar Ti SoddoV 7 


, > , a / x vA 
eXevOepov civar Svadéper, TOOTO péytotov av evporTe, 
iva rn a Aa 
OTL Tois ev SovAOLS TO TO“a TAY adLKNMAaTOV aTar- 


¢ , , b a 3 , x \ , 
Ttav vTevOuvov éortt, Tois 5 édevOépois, Kav Ta pé- 


bd] a a 7 y al ° 
ylota atuyadow?, TovTS y' &verts cdaat' els YpwaTa 


\ 0 ee | yA \ “ / \ , 
yap thy’ Sikny mepi Tov TrElcTM@Y Tapa TovTwY 
‘ / e ’ > , 
mpoonkes NauPavew. 6 Sé TovvayTioy eis TA THmaTA, 


56 domep avdpatrddois, éroiuncato™ Tas Tipmwpias. 
Oédere B. 


© é0é\ere Z Bens, 
ad.txouvres Bekk. Illud =YQs. 
¥ éroeiro Z Bekk. Bens. cum =r, 


(in Xenophon’s works, ¢c. 1. § 
10). The statement of Demo- 
sthenes (Mid. p. 529 § 46) that 
a UBpews ypadyn protected the 
persons of slaves as well as of 
freemen, is probably to be un- 
derstood with limitation to the 
particular kind of i8pis referred 
to by Aeschines l.c. Compare 
Dict. Antiq. 's.v. Hybreos Gra- 
phé. For the darker side of the 
treatment of slaves, see Prof. 
Mahaffy’s work, p. 243. 

§55. Kay ra péyiora druxaow] 
A much better reading than pé- 
yiora Tixwow adtkodyres, but it 
should be written, with Ben- 
seler and Cobet, puéyicr’ arv- 
xaov. The hiatus ofa before 
a is intolerable. Like the eu- 
phemistic use of ‘wanted’ and 
‘being in trouble’ by our police- 
men and others, druyei had 
special reference at Athens to 
dryula. A passage in Mid. p. 
533 §§ 58—60 is interesting for 
the feeling it displays on this 
point. Demosthenes first apo- 
logises for naming men in 
public and alluding to their 
misfortunes: mapairjooua 8 
buds pndev axbecOjval por, éav 
éml guugopats Twar yeyovdrwr 
évouacTt pync0G, where Butt- 


a 
OUT@ 


P péyiora TUXWOoW 
4 r7v om. Bens., cum DTATQOkrs. 


mann notes ‘él cunopais yeyo- 
vores sunt nriunuévor’ [he should 
have said 7riuwuévor]. He then 
mentions the cases of Sannio 
a chorus trainer (otros dorpa- 
telas jw Kal Kéxpynrar cuupopa. 
TOUTOY peTa TI GTUXLaV TaAv- 
tnv...) and Aristides a member 
of a chorus who had once been 
its coryphaeus. (yruxnKws Te Kat 
otros Towvrov). It appears that 
the rival Choregi might legally 
have objected to the employ- 
ment of these men:* and they 
were strongly tempted to do so, 
for, as Demosth. observes, if you 
deprive it of its leader the rest 
of the chorus is ruined (olyera). 
But they refrained from pressing 
their objection, involving, as it 
would have done, the arrest of 
the defendants: partly,no doubt, 
from humanity, but chiefly, as 
Demosth. insists, from regard 
to the sacred character of the 
festival: they thus serve to point 
a moral against Midias, who 
was no choregus engaged in an 
expensive and jealous contest, 
but a private man. Compare 
below § 2 ras idlas cuudopas 
dvedifew Kal mpopépew éxdorTy. 
Timocr. §§ 132, 200. 

§§ 56—58. Though the son 


610 


P. 610.] 


IIAPANOMON. 59 


a - AL oy Pag me 

aicypes Kal TAEovEeKTIKaS ExxYe TPOS Uuds WoTE 
\ x / a 

TOV pév EavTOD TaTépa Meto Seiv, Snwooia SeOévTa 
\ / > a 

emt ypnuacw év To Secpwrnpio, pnte amooovra 
a t , > a A > + 

TavTa pnte KpiOévTa aTrodpavat, Tov 8 GAXwV TON- 

TOV TOV wn SuVdpEevovy TA EavTOD Oetvat oiKxober eis 
\ / vA , Mah eG es / ¢ ¢ a 

TO Secpatnptov EdxecOar. eit’ érl TovToLs, Ws dTLOdY 


op 4 aA a > Lv . / Z \ @P 
efov €avT@ Trolely, 2iWaTNY Tpocnveyvpate Kal Pa- 


of a man who had broken prison 
and escaped the payment of his 
just debts, Androtion does not 
hesitate to bring false and cruel 
charges of indebtedness to the 
state against innocent persons. 

§ 56. The rhetorical anti- 
thesis here is extremely well 
worked out, and shows the early 
maturity of dewédrys in the young 
orator. Andron, the father of 
Androtion (1) escapes from a 
prison (2) in which he has 
actually been incarcerated (3) 
by public authority, dnuocia de- 
Gévra (4) for debts really due 
to the treasury (éml xpyuace 
Sc. Kowots, supplied by Reiske). 
Androtion (1) drags to a prison 
‘(2) from their own homes (3) 
without authority (4) people 
who have not the means of 
paying what they never owed 
(ra éavrov explained by pnéev 
épethdvTwv below). It is implied, 
on the one hand, that it is worse 
to break prison than to escape 
from custody before one has 
reached the prison (hence éy r@ 
decuwrnplw is added to deAévra) : 
on the other, that dragging men 
from their homes (olko@ev) is 
worse than mere unlawful de- 
tention. Compare Quintilian’s 
analysis (vir. 4, § 8) of the way 
in which Cicero heightens the 
effect in 1, Phil, 25 § 63: Per 
se deforme, vel non in coetu, 
vomere: in coetu, etiam non 


populi: populi, etiam non Ro- 
mani: vel, si nullum negotium 
gereret: vel, si non publicum: 
vel, si non magister equitum. 

@eTo Oetv...dmodpava] ‘allow- 
ed to escape’ K. But the words 
need not imply that A. had either 
assisted or connived at the es- 
cape; they may mean merely 
that the son of a man who had 
escaped from prison might be 
expected to show some feeling 
for prisoners. On gero deity, 
§ 32 n. 

unre arodévra...unre kpibévra] 
There were two lawful modes of 
terminating his imprisonment: 
by paying the claim without dis- 
puting it, or by standing his 
trial and obtaining an acquittal. 
Andron chose neither. The first 
extract from this passage in the 
Timocrates ends with this sen- 
tence ; €\xeo Oar is there expanded 
into dxdévra bd’ éavrod dedé- 
cba. 

mpoonvexvpasve] In Timoer. § 
197 these oppressive proceedings 
arefurther described ; Androtion, 
and his associate Timocrates, 
distrain upon the fixtures, fur- 
niture, and slaves of their vic- 
tims: pniéva mwmor éejoat, 
a&rNA, Ovpas apacpely Kal oTpamad 
Uroorday Kal dudxovov, 7 Tis éxpy- 
To, TavTny évexupdgew. The usage 
of évexupdgew (the compound 
mpocevex. occurs only here) ap- 
pears to vary between (1) the 


60 ‘KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§$ 57—59. 


57 vootparny, avOpdtrovs mopvas, ov pévTou® opethovaas 


=> , / yy v 8 a > a5) ; 
evo popas. KQUTOL €b TLOLW apa OKOUVOLVY €ETTLTNOELAL 


n n a > ‘ 
exetvat Trabeiv, aAdad TO Tpayua ye ovK éruTndeLov 


fol lal \ 
ylyvecOat, THALKODTO Tivas dpovetvy Sid Katpdv WoTe 
’ / 
Badifew én’ oixias Kal oxe’n héperv pondev cperrov- 


S wévro ye = Bekk. 


ace. of the person distrained 
upon, and (2) the acc. of the 
property seized, In the passage 
just cited from the Timocrates 
it is clearly the latter: 7 d:dxovos 
must be a female slave who is 
part of the property. So in 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 21 évexupdter 6 
vouwobérns Tas ovcolas Tas Tor 
UrevOivuv, Ews dv NOyor adrodact 
7TH wode. In Mid. p.518§10 py 
éfeivar unre évexupdoat unre Aap- 
Bavewy €repov érépov, and c. Everg. 
p. 1163 § 79 ef & euol wpyicOnre 
OTe évexupdcwy AAOov él THYv ol- 
klav Tod Ocopjuov, the construc- 
tion is (apparently) absolute: 
‘to take pledges,’ not ‘to take 
in pledge.’ In the present pas- 
sage K, is unquestionably right 
in giving (1) as the meaning, 
‘he distrained upon Sinope and 
Phanostrata, women of the town 
certainly, but not owing any 
_ property-tax.’ Had they been 
slaves, seized in payment of a 
state demand, the hardship (ac- 
cording to Athenian notions) 
would have been upon their 
master, not themselves. 
avOpwmrovs mopvas| The fem. 
7 dvOpwrros, like the conventional 
English use of ‘a person’ for 
one who does not rank as a 
‘lady,’ is applied to women of 
the lower classes generally, whe- 
ther bond or free. L. and §, 
remark that it is used ‘con- 
temptuously, of female slaves,’ 
In reality the expression implies 


pévro y Bens. 


pity quite as often as contempt, 
and as it is not noticed in the 
index to Demosthenes, it may 
be worth while to cite some pas- 
sages where it is certainly ap- 
plied (as here) to free persons. 
In Dem. de Fals, Leg. pp. 402—3 
§§ 197—8 (= 218, 220 R. 8.) the 
victim of the outrage of which 
Demosth. (falsely it would seem) 
accuses Aeschines is called 7% 
dvOpwiros; yet she was a respect- 
able married woman, éhevOépay 
kal cwdpova § 196, the wife of 
Aristophanes of Olynthus, Aes- 
chin. de F, L. § 154. Again the 
pérocxos Whom Aristogiton cru- 
elly tried to sell as a slave, but 
who was proved to be free, is 7 
dv Opwros 1. Aristogit. p. 787 § 57. 

§ 57. mabey] absolutely, ‘fit 
to be harshly treated.’ The 
aorist is used, as he is speaking 
of this particular case; in the 
next sentence the application is 
general, and he says rdoyew. 

THALKOUTO TiVas povely Sid Kat- 
pov] ‘that persons should be so 
insolent upon opportunity of- 
fered:’ because of .the opportu- 
nity which tempted them to vio- 
lence. 

oxe’n pépev] would generally 
mean ‘to carry baggage,’ for 
which Xenophon’s usual word 
is cxevodopetv : the context shows 
that the sense here is to ‘carry 
away furniture,’ of which orpw- 
pal? vrooravy Timocr, I. c. is a 
particular instance. 


59 


P. 611] 


> 4 : 
tov avOporwv. moda yap av tis id 
f , ; 
emiTnocious dvtas' wacyxew Kal wetrovbévar. 


TIAPANOMON. 











er 


a) , ’ n 
TAaUTA AéyouTW ob VOMOL OVdE TA THS TOALTElas On, 
\ / ith. Se > t Save . 
a pvdaKktéoy vpiv’ GAN €veotiv Edeos, cvyyvoepmn, 


; > ef / lal > / 
mdv@ oca mpoonker Tos édevOépors. 


e 2 
@V OUTOS 


¢ , > , eb] / a / Paws a 
ATaVT@OV ELKOTWS OU mETeXEL TH HUGEL OVSEe TH Tat- 
mt \ \ ¢ \ D 

Sela’ moda yap UBpictac Kal mpotemndaKioTat 
\ ’ > A Ae OG ae ’ > \ es 

TUVOV OUK ayaT@ow avTov’ avOpwrrots, ad\rAd Sodvat 611 

; e ° ’ 

pucbov duvapévois’ bv mpoonKé cou THY opynv ovK 
n nw \ 

els TOY TOMLT@Y TOY TUYdVTAa adtévat OVS eis Tas 
/ / > > > \ “A 

OmoTeXVOUS TOPVasS, AX Els TOV TOvVTOY TOV TpoTV 


oe OpéravTa. 


dt n ‘ 4 \ ] } \ \ A U 
QUT TOLVUY WS MEV OV OELVA KAL Tapa WAaVTAS 


\ t > 54 / ® d a pes, \ 
TOUS vomous ovyx e&et éyerv OVTOS* OUVTw SO éaTiv 
¢, ? n ’ ? 
dvavo0ns Oot év TO Snww, TWpoaywvas ael KaTacKEVA- 

lal A nr al / 
fav avT@ THade THS ypadis, éTOkpa Aéyew ws Urrép 
4 - \ 3 ¢ an > >? i? \ ~ \ 
vpov Kal ov vas éyOpods ép’ EavTov eidKuce Kal 


t om. Bens. cum >TOQrs. 
Vv airov > Bekk, Bens. cum =TOrs. 


§ 58. ras ouoréxvous wipvas] 
Whatever we may think of the 
good taste of this passage, there 
can be no question as to its de- 
vorns—telling force of expression. 
It is difficult to agree with Cobet 
(Misc. Crit. p. 525) that this de:- 
vorns is improved by the omis- 
sion of wépvas. 

§§ 59—64. Restatement and 
expansion of the argument in 
§ 42, as to the cause of Andro- 
tion’s unpopularity. It is not, 
as he pretends, because he has 
discharged an invidious duty in 
a patriotic spirit: but because he 
‘added insult to injury’ in his 
mode of collecting the tax. And 
the proof by contrary is, that 
Satyrus, who collected a much 


larger sum for the navy estimates, 
incurred no unpopularity, as he 
gave no offence by his manner of 
levying it. The jury, if by their 
verdict they shield from punish- 
ment such callousness and dis- 
honesty as Androtion’s, will be 
thought to resemble him. 

§ 59. mpodywrvas del xara- 
oKevagfwr] ‘striving always to an- 
ticipate his defence to this in- 
dictment, he dared repeatedly 
(éro\ua) to say,’ &e. Modern 
edd. accent the word mpodywr, 
theolder rpoayav. TheScholiast 
Ulpian explains: IIpoayavés eice 
Aoyor of rpoeurperifovres nulv Tov 
OixacTav Thy aKonv’ aya yap 7 
Kplots, 


ar 
nh 


VERSTI' 


THE 


60 


62 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [§§ 59—62. 


nr > Lal : te / > , \ s ¢ n 
viv év tois éoxatos éotl Kivduvos. eyo 8 dvyir, 
= v > nr lal na 
@ avdpes “A@nvaiot, BovrAopat SeiEav TovTov ovTE 
, rn i 
meTovOoTa ovd OTLody KaKOV OTE wéddOVTA TATYELY 
. ide § >. ® ¢ \ ¢ a »” PS \ / \ ¢ al 
ovdev Ov’ Ov Umrép vay Erpake, Sia pwévtot THY adTOD 
Boervpiav Kai GeowrexPpiay removOdTa pév péxpe 
THaoE THS Nmepas ovodev, Teicdpevov ©, av Ta Sixara 
al e n / \ egos / > Cy “A 
TomtTe vets. oKeiyracbe yap wol. te mo? vpiv 
ovTos UméryeTO Kai TL TroLEty aUTOV ExeLtpoToVnTAD 
duels; XpHwata elompaTTew. Addo O€ Tpos TOUT 
hépe 6) xa’ Exactov vropvnce 
? > 7 / \ 
ovtos etoétrpake Aemrivny Tov 


/ al XO\ 
Ti Toveiy 3 ovode ev. 
THV eloTpakw vas. 
> f- / \ / \ \ 
éx Koidns téttapas xal tpiakovta Spaypas, Kal 
@ccdEevov tov “Adwmexnbev Spaypyds éBdopunKxovta 
Kal wixpov Te mpos, Kal Tov Evdypcv Kaddxparny 
kal tov Tedéotov veavioxov’ ovK éyw yap Tovvopa 
eitretv' oxeddv O€ mavtas, os eicémpakev, va pr 

> & , % sd) 7 ¢ \ n > / 
Kal ExacTov Neyo, OVK O10 Ee TVA UTEP pay odei- 


OeacexOpiay] The various 
readings show that MS. 2 
has here almost alone escaped 
interpolation. It is proper to 
write @eots éxOpés as two words, 
OeowrexOpia as one, like xands 
kaya0os but xadoxaryabia: Cobet, 
Nov. Lect. p. 394, Sandys on 
Isocr. Paneg. § 79. The word 
being a rare one, -ex@play was 
confused with the adj. éx@pdv, 
and aicxpoxépsecay supplied to 
make sense: ef. Timocr. § 195. 
In Aristoph. Vesp. 418 deowex- 
Opiay, variously corrupted in 
the MSS., was first restored by 


Bentley, according to Dindorf; © 


after him by Dobree Advers. 1. 
198. 

§ 60. Aemrivny rov éx Koldns] 
Whether this was the Leptines 
against whose law Demosth. 
made his famous speech is un- 


certain. In a naval inscription 
in Boeckh pp. 377—8, mention 
is made of this Leptines in con- 
nexion with his heir, who was 
among the trierarchs about B.c. 
345—342; Aemrivov éx Kotdns 
’OvomwaxrAys ‘“Exadneev. 

puxpov Tt wpds| G. H. Schaefer 
compares for this phrase 1. Phil. 
p. 47 § 28 rddavra évevnxovra Kal 
puxpov Te pos: and for rdv Tedé- 
orou veavicxov, Plat. Gorg. 418 & 
tov Ilvpiddurrovs veaviav. The 
amounts levied from Callicrates 
son of Eupherus (or KEuphemus) 
and ‘the young son of Telestus’ 
are not mentioned. 

el twa brép pvavy] Boeckh 
P. E. p. 531 has some remarks 
on the number of persons re- 
quired to make up Androtion’s 
seven talents by such small con- 
tributions: and R.W. aptly points 


61 


62 


P. 612.] 


HAPANOMON. 


63 


, b 3 by / 4 a 
AovTa. ToTep ovv olecbe To’Twy ExacTov piceiy 


. a Cer. \ \ > \ , x \ 
Kal Torepely avtT@ Sta THY eiopopayv TavTyY, 7 Tov 612 


\ Ae , > t Cid AP ales aA gr 
PEV AUTOYV, OTL TAVTMVY AKOVOVT@V UM@YV EV T@ Sno 


an s 
SodAov én cal éx Sovrwv eivat Kal TpoonKe avT@e 


\@ / > / \ n , rf \x 
TO Extov pépos elohépery pera TOV peToixwy, TO O€ 


maidas €x Topyns eivat, TOU Sé Tov TaTépa HTaLpn- 


Zz a x \ UA fe) \ Si Ap 
Kévat, TOD O€ THY pNTépa TeTopvEedaOat, Tov Sé atro- 
ypahew boa vdeireto €€ apyns, Tov Oé TO deiva, 

\ be ¢ a e \ \ bu \ teen e/ 2 
Tov S€ dpod pnta Kal appnta kaka, éEns Aravtas ; 


4 \ \ \ aN? of , bd \ > , 
éyd pev yap old OTL TWavTes, Els ovs éTap@vnceEV 


x § ort Bens. cum libris. 


out that éXivyous in § 42 may be 
inaccurately used by Demosth. 
in his wish to disparage the ser- 
vices of Androtion. 

§ 61. rdv perv at’r&y, dri] The 
construction is changed, as Ken- 
nedy observes in a note, and in- 
dicates by the turn given to the 
sentence in his translation: in- 
stead of 7@ dé watdas...civac we 
should have expected rév dé, ore 
égn...etvac. ‘Or rather for dif- 
ferent reasons: one, because he 
said—another he declared had 
children.’ 

7d €xrov pépos elapépev] The 
elapopa was of the nature of a 
graduated property (not income) 
tax; and the division into classes 
and corresponding rates of tax- 
ation have been made out with 
great probability by Boeckh P. 
E. p. 519: ef. Dict. Antiq. 8. v. 
Hisphora. First class, above 
twelve talents, one-fifth reckon- 
ed as taxable; second, six to 
twelve talents, one-sixth; third, 
two to six talents, one-eighth; 
fourth, 25 minae to two talents, 
one-tenth. If, as appears from 
the present passage, the resident 
aliens returned uniformly, like 
citizens of the second class, a 


Illud e coni. Reiskii. 


sixth part of their property as 
taxable, the poorer classes among 
them would be much more hea- 
vily rated than citizens of equal 
fortune. Very few aliens, it is 
probable, could have possessed a 
Jirst class property, and so have 
gained by this arrangement. 

é& dpxyjs] The older critics 
and translators understood this 
of the plunder of ‘ office:’ G. 
H. Schaefer first saw that it 
simply meant ‘from the begin- 
ning’ of his career, and has 
been universally followed. 

Tov 6é 7d Setva} ‘another he 
said this and that about; ano- 
ther he abused by wholesale; 
and so on with all.” K. Compare 
de Cor. p.'268 § 122 Bods pyrd 
kal appyta dvoudiwr, womep é€ 
audéns, Mid. p. 540 § 79 riv un- 
répa Kdwe kal mwavras quads pnra 
kal dppynra Kxaxd ééetrov. On 
certain abusive terms expressly 
denounced as ‘actionable,’ see 
Dict. Antiq. s.v. Aporrheta. 

§ 62. els ods érapgvnoev] ‘a- 
gainst whom he so intemperate- 
ly conducted himself.’ K. pre- 
serving the metaphor. Demosth. 
says below 77 cavrod mporerela 
Kat Opaciryrt. We need not 


63 


64 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [§§ 62—64. 


e \ \ > \ ve ’ al 3 / 
odTOS, THY bev eiahopay ExacTos avayKaioy avahopa 
¢ U S a y é 3 @ | \ 
UmeAap Paver eivat, ToradTa’ & atiysacbeis Kal Tpo- 

la \ al eA > a in) e/ 
mnraxiabeis yareT@s Eevivoyev. KaxKelvo oda. OTL 
U U fal , a 
XPN“ATA eloTpaTTELW TOUTOV exeLpoTovncal vets, 

aS \ 20 / \ > / \ , 
ovyl tds idias cuudopas ovedifeww Kal mpopépew 
€ U v \ a 
éxaoT@. elite yap joav arnOeis, ov col pytéas 

\ eh tee ee ’ € , , s 
(ToAXAa yap Huav ExacTos oY ws BovrETAL TpaTTEL) 
elTe un Tpoonkovaas KaTecKevales, THs OVX OTLODY 
x , / Aon 4 / > ASR, 2 , 
av mado Sixaiws ; Ett Toivuy éx Tovd axptBéorepov 
yudcecbe O74 pure’ TovTov €xactos ov Sid TaD © 
elomrpakiv, adn’ vmrep Ov vBpiaGn Kab errappry On. 
Ldtupos yap 6 Tor vewplov eripenarns ovx, éemTa 
Tadavta cicérpakey viv, adda TéTTapa Kai TpLa- 


Y ravra Z Bekk. Bens. cum [TOra™. 


think of actual intoxication: fyréau] ‘The greater the truth 


Mr Paley observes on c. Conon. 
p. 1257 § 4 ‘ wdpouos and mapor- 
vey mean, not to be intoxicated,’ 


but ‘to be abusive over one’s - 


cups.’ and here, it may be added, 
apply to violence like that of a 
man in his cups, though not 
alcoholic in its origin. Mr San- 
dys on Isoer. Demon. § 30 and 
on Demosth. ¢. Conon. l. c. 
points out, in correction of Lid- 
dell and Scott, that aapowety is 
never used transitively in the 
active voice (rapowely els Twa, 
not mapowely twa): but like 
many other intransitive verbs 
it has a passive. So in the next 
section we find d8plc@n xal éra- 
pyv70n: and in de Fals. Leg. 
p. 403 § 198=220 dmwder’ a 
mapowounevyn, ‘the victim of his 
drunken frolic’ R. 8. 

Xpnwara elampdarrew TOUTOV 
éxeporovncad” vets] =a xp7- 
para elompatrra. Donalds. Gr. 
p. 598. 

elre yap joav ddnBets, od coi 


the greater the libel’ was a 
maxim of English law until 
Lord Campbell’s Act of 1843. 
‘Sect. 6 of that Act allows, on 
an indictment or information 
for a defamatory libel, a plea 
that it was true and that its 
publication was for the public 
benefit. P. Vernon Smith, 
English Inst. p. 64. 

mwohha... mparre] ‘fares in 
many respects,’ intransitive. 
Not to be confused with moda 
movetv, or with the phrase ro\\d 
mparrew ‘to be a busybody.’ 

§ 63. 6 Tdv vewplwy émryedn- 
tis] Dict. Antigq. s.v. Epime- 
letae, no. 5. The duty of the 
ériueAnral in relation to the 
oxevn, ‘tackling’ or ‘naval 
stores’ generally, is well brought 
out in [Demosth.] c. Everg. et 
Mnesib. p. 1145 §§ 20—22 espe- 
cially é0évia cal orummeta Kal 
oxolvia, ols KaTagkevdgeTat Tpt- 
nP"S- 


P. 613-] TIAPANOMON. 65 
\ bp) ‘ : / b] 4 3 e la 
KOVTA TOs av’TOvs ToUTOUs avOparous, €E av Tapé- 
" a y ae J 
Onxe Ta oKeln Tais éxTrAEVTATaLs vavoiv’ Kal OUT 
> a \ a 2Q7 > \ e a \ 5S 
éxeivos Sia Tadta ovdéva éyOpov aita dyaiv eivat, 
wv an ? / > \ ? / a 
ovTe Tav celompayOévTmy ovdels éxelv@ TrorEpmeEl. 
ElKOTMS' O ev Yap TO TpocTEeTaypmEVoY, oluat, StE- 
mTpatreto, cv dé TH cavTOD TpoTeTela Kal OpaciTnTt 
AaBov éEovciay TON avnr@xodTas eis FHV TOA O13 
a / 
avOpdtrous Kal cov Pedtiovs Kal éx Bertedvwv >Wev- 
al > a 
déou kal yareTrois oveiderw ov Seiv reptBadrreww. 
lows ta a ¢ \ fal a 
64 cita tad? ovToL TecPGow UTép avTaY cE ToLElD, 
\ \ al fal b] / \ f »” >»? 
Kal Ta THS THS avatoOnalas Kal Tovnpias épya éd 
: ’ a U 
avrovs avadéEwrtat; adra puceiv Sixacotepov dia 
Peer > ' AN / \ \ ty oN t 
TaUTa oe Oheidovcw 7 o@lew. TOV yap UTEP TOAEWS 
D , 5 a er Tae r oY?) ‘8 Az 
TpaTTovTa TL Sel TO THS TONES OOS pipeto Pas, Kal 
/ ¢ on \ Ud S + o lal 
cwlew viv Tods ToLovToUs, © dvdpes ’AOnvaiot, mpoc- 
a eee. « ¢ a 
HKEL, KaL ficeiy Tos olooTEp” ovUTOS. ws éxelvo 


* kal 69 Z Bekk. Bens, cum =Q. 
® olovarep Z Bens. cum ZFY v. not. 


BeXrlous kal éx Bedridvwr] ‘ of 
better character and better fa- 
mily.’ So in Herod, ir. 143 § 5 
Tilpwuw éx Iipwaos is ‘a man 
and the son of a man,’ as op- 
posed to god or hero. Aristoph. 
Eq. 185—6 pév éx xadrov ef Ka- 
yabGv; AA, pa rods Oeods | ef 
pn’k movnpav y’ : where I observe 
that Dindorf omits to credit 
Elmsley with the correction ef 

pn ’« for ety” éx of the MSS. 

§ 64. dvaic@notas Kal movn- 
plas] ‘take upon themselves 
(make themselves responsible 
for) the acts of your callousness 
and dishonesty : dvacOnolas re- 
ferring to his insults, rovnpias 
to his unjust exactions. K. 
somewhat loosely translates 
‘wickedness and brutality.’ The 
reading dvawwyurtias has. not 
found favour with the editors, but 


W. D. 


is preferred on internal grounds 
by Cobet, Misc. Crit. p. 526. 
cwrewv] ‘support, protect, 
countenance:’ here opposed to 
pucety, More usually to droddv- 
va. ‘The form with ¢ ctw, 
thoroughly discussed by Usener 
in Fleckeisen’s Jahrb. 1865, p. 
238 f., is established by the 
Heraclean Tables (kareowtapes 
Stud. iv. 428), by Attic inscrip- 
tions of a very early date and 
by grammarians. Of course 
owe can only have come from 
owttw.’ Curtius, Gk. Verb, p. 
523, E.T. In other words, 
owgw is formed from adj. cwos 
(in the best Attic ows, Timocr. 
§ 106 n.) like kabapive from xa- 
Oapos, gwppovlgr from cudpwr. 
rovs oloorep ovtos] The best 
MSS., rightly followed by the 
Zurich editors, Benseler, and 


~ 


+9] 


66 KATA ANAPOTIONO® | [§§ 65, 66. 


nF 4 oy 4 Sa , N ‘ 
eidoot pev iows, bBuws Sé€ €pw* OTrolovs Tivas av 
haivnobe ayaravtes Kal awfovtes, TovToLs SpoLoL 
do€er eivas. 

7 

“Ort toivuy Sdws ovdé THY elomrpakw adtiy UTép 
¢ a n na 
vueav eroinrat, Kal TovTo avTixa 67) para viv 
Sjrov” roimow. ef yap Tis époito av’tov ToTEpoL 
> tal fal ad a 
avt@ Soxovow adiKeiy waddov Tv TOL, Of yewp- 
yoovtes Kal devdopevor, Sia tatdotpodias bé xal 
> lal 3 , \ U e / 
olKela avadwpata Kal eLTOUpYias ETEpas éddEAOL- 


> udN jyiv Sjdov Bens. 


Cobet, Var. Lect. p. 551, Misc. 
Crit. p. 526, preserve the at- 
traction of olovarep=taovrous 
oloorep. Compare § 77 ovd’ ol- 
oomrep od xXpwmevor cuuBovdors, 
with the parallel passage of the 
Timocrates § 185. In the last 
instance the case is even strong- 
er: all MSS. exhibit olfowzep, 
which Bekker (followed by Din- 
dorf) corrected as though it were 
a solecism. G. H. Schaefer, 
who had defended this attrac- 
tion in his notes on Bos’ El- 
lipses, writes here ‘ Nondum 
poenitet illa sceripsisse, etsi 
meum mecum Dindorfium dis- 
sensisse vidi,’ 

§§ 65—78. The remainder of 
thespeech, with the exception of 
a@ paragraph or two, is repeated 
in Timoer, §§ 172—186. 

§§ 65—68. His pretence of 
public spirit is easily exposed: 
for while levying arrears of taxes 
on men for whose shortcomings 
there was often the excuse of in- 
ability to pay, he has done no- 
thing, in a long political career, 
for the repression of much more 
serious offences. The public 
treasury has been robbed of much 
larger sums, the contributions of 
our allies and of those who pay 


para dirov vuiv Z Bekk. 


their taxes readily. Many ge- 
nerals and orators have been 
brought to justice for these pecu- 
lations: you, Androtion, never 
took your place as the accuser of 
any of these, never expressed in- 
dignation at the way the state 
was being fleeced. The fact is 
(here the speaker again turns to 
the jury) that Androtion, and 
men like him, are accomplices 
with such offenders and share 
largely in their illicit gains. 
He is one of that class of delin- 
quents himself: he has treated 
you with contempt, in fact worse 
than slaves. Now is your op- 
portunity to make an example of 
him. 

§ 65. adrixa 5) pada] The 
strengthening of avrixa either 
by 6% or wdda is common both 
in Plato and the Orators. The 
doubly emphatic atrixa 6h wdda 
occurs also Timocr. §§ 32, 172, 
208, 1. Aristog. p. 778 § 29: and 
it appears from Shilleto’s Annot. 
Crit. on de Fals. Leg. p.-346 
§ 18 that there is good MS. au- 
thority for the phrase in at least 
two or three other passages 
where it has not yet found its 
way into the printed texts, Cf. 
on Timoer. § 111. 


P. 613.] 


TIAPANOMON. 67 


/ > \ A e \ a 3 , > 7 
Totes eLapopar, 1 of Ta T@V EOeAnodvTOV eioeveyKetv 
Ul \ \ , 
XPnpata Kal Ta Tapa TOV cTUMpayov KrérToVTEs Kal 
> / > a 
aTONUVTES, OUK GV Eis TOdTO TéApuns SyTrOv®, KaiTrep 
a bs 8 \ EXO v4 fal \ Vie a \ 
av avaidys, €or wate dhoat Tors Ta éavTaY pn) 
> / a io lal x \ \ Ar ¢ 
elapepovtas fadXov adcKeiv  TOvs TA Kowa Udatpov- 
s a 
66 wévous. Tivos otv évexa, & Bdedupé, era bvTaY 
; n , 13s “e \ t ’ 
TELOVOY 7) TPLaKOVTAa ap ov ov ToduTeVEL, Kal év 
, Lal / lal \ lal 
TOUT@ TO XKPOvM TOANOY peVv OTPATHYaY HdiKNKSTwV 
\ f a de € s a \ \ 
THY TOM, TOKK@Y OE PNHTOPWY, Ol Tapa TovToLcl 
© Syrov toduns Z Bekk. Illud =. 


ol Ta TaV EbeXnodyTUW...KréT- 
rovres Kal dmro\dvvTes] K.’s ren- 
dering, ‘those who plunder your 
allies and destroy the means of 
people willing to pay the tax,’ 
contains several inaccuracies. 
It should rather be ‘those who 
plunder and waste the money of 
people who have readilypaidtheir 
property-tax, and that which 
comes from the allies.’ There 
is, I think, no reference to the 
levying of requisitions or other 
ways of forcible extortion: the 
money embezzled is that which 
has already come into the trea- 
sury, not that which is ‘ fructi- 
fying in the pockets’ of the 
people: and it comes from two 
main sources, the property-tax 
(elepopa) paid by the citizens 
and the tribute (@épos) paid by 
the allies. ray é0eAnowTwr 
elceveyxetv Means simply those 
who are not in arrear, opposed 
to é\XeXourr bres. 

§ 66. modd\Gv pev orparnydav 
... TANGY 62 pyropwv] The most 
conspicuous example of an ora- 
tor so prosecuted during the 30 
years ending s.c. 355 is that 
of Callistratus, whose execution 
- had taken place the year before, 
356. He had been capitally 
condemned in 361 for his share 


in the loss of Oropus (366): had 
gone into exile, but had ventured 
to return. The prosecutions of 
Timotheus (acquitted 373, con- 
victed and went into exile 358) 
and of Iphicrates (acquitted 358, 
but not afterwards employed) 
had deprived Athens of her best 
generals: at the close of the 
Social War (356—5) the com- 
mand was entrusted to the brave 
but incapable and profligate 
Chares. In commenting on one 
of these transactions Grote is 
rather too indulgent to ‘the 
terrible difficulties which the 
Grecian generals now experience 
in procuring money from Athens 
(or from other cities in whose 
service they are acting) for pay- 
ment of their troops...and which 
will be found yet more painfully 
felt as we advance forward in the 
history’ (ch. 77, vit. 132). The 
truth is more plainly stated by 
a writer in Dict. Biogr. s. v.’ 
Chares, who speaks of ‘the 
miserable system then prevail- 
ing, when the citizens of Athens 
would neither fight their own 
battles nor pay the men who 
fought them, and her command- 
ers had to support their mer- 
cenaries as best they could.’ It 
is, in fact, ‘making war pay for 


5—2 


67 


68 KATA ANAPOTIONOS  [8§ 67, 68: 


KéxpwvTat, av ot pev TeOvadow é ols Hdixour, ot 5 
tmoxapnoavres’ hevyovo,ovdevds rwTrote €Entad Ons 


KaTHyopos, vO adyavaxTadv BHhOns twép dv 1 Torts O14 


Tacxov°, ovTws av Opacds Kal déyeww Sewds, AAV 
évtadl? édavns Kndemov adv', od ce ToAXovs det 
Kaxes Touncat; BovrecOe, & avdpes *“AOnvaiot, To 
ToUT@D aitiov eyo Umiv Elrw ; OTL TOUT@V® meV mEeTEYEL’ 
av adikodow vas TLVes, aro bé TAY eloTpaTTOMéVvOD 
tdatpetrar’ Sv admAnotiav Sé TpdTov dixyobev Kap- 
TovTat TY TOMY, oUTE yap padov TOAXO!s Kal wiKpa” 


4 drox. Bens. cum ZF YTOQsty. 


f xndeuov yuov dv Bekk. 


h 7a uixpa Bekk. Bens. cum 2. 


itself’ with considerably less 
success than in the case of the 
French revolutionary armies. 
ovdevds mumore €énrdcbns KarT7- 
yopos]| Bekker inserts rovrwy 
from one MS, and the parallel 
passage in the Timocrates. Har- 
pocration: *"Eferdgecdar dvti too 
opacha, Anuocbévns kara Zrepa- 
vou (p. 1121 § 66 gidoTimovpevov 
éteratecGar ‘to show oneself a 
man of public spirit’) cal év 7@ 
kat ‘Avdporiwvos. He might 
have added rep! rod Zrepavov : de 
Cor. p. 286 § 173 Kal Aéywv Kal 
ypdgwy é&nrafounv ra déov’ vrép 
uur, ‘proved, found on inquiry :’ 
ib. p. 294 § 197 rotro meroinkws 
éml rots cupBaow eénracar. Other 
usages of éferafew are discussed 
by Mr Sandys ont. Steph. p. 1124 
76. 
macxor] MSS. rdoxer. ‘ Equi- 
dem malim rdcxo.’ Bekk., which 
Dindorf has adopted without 
comment and quite unneces- 
sarily. The Attic writers by no 
means rigidly conform to the 
rules for the ‘ sequence of tenses:’ 
Xenophon is perhaps the most 
regular, On the interchange of 


© maoxot solus Dind. v. not. 
& v. not. 
Kara puxpa Z cum Fk, 


ind. and opt. in dependent sen- 
tences cf. Madvig, Synt. § 130, b: 
Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, 
§ 70, 2: anda note on Protag. 
335 AL 

Opacds Kal Aéyerv Secvds] § 25 n. 
Omitted in ||'Timocr. rk 

§ 67. 87 roUTwv wév] The MSS. 
here show signs of interpolation 
from || Timocr., giving mostly 
the plurals peréyouow...vpatpody- 
Tat...Kapmovvyrac: and Benseler 
cuts matters short by reading 
Tov pev Vpapeira and omitting 
the intervening words. Cobet,’ 
conservative for once, agrees 
with Dindorf’s reading in the 
text, Misc. Crit. p. 532. 

ore yap paov| ‘For it is not 
more agreeable to quarrel with 
a large number of petty offenders 
than with a small number of 
great ones, and surely it is not 
more like a friend of the people 
to notice the crimes of the many 
than those of the few.’ K. An- 
drotion therefore, if an honest 
man, might more naturally be 
expected to prosecute generals 
and orators than poor people in- 
arrear with their taxes, 


68 


P. 614] ITAPANOMON. 69 


b] fal ’ / x 
adikovaw atreyOaverOat  OrtLyoLs Kal jLeyaXa, oUTE 
, , aes an 
Snpotixkotepov SHtrov TA TOV TOANGY GdiKnpwata 6pav 
x \ a an 
9 Ta TOV ONlywV. AAA TOOT aiTLov OVYyoO Aéyo. 
tal \ 10 ¢€ \ 7 a 2) , £* -<ine 6’ 
TOV Mey OlOEY EAUTOV OYTA, THY adLKOUYTMY, DLas 
3 \ 3 / ¢ / e ‘ a , : 
ovdevds afious nynoato* 610 TodtTov éypnoato Tov 
/ ret fal > \ ’ , , , \ \ ~ 
TpOTroV Uptv.* El yap avOpaTrodwV TONS, ANNA pL) TOV 
wv e / gf / ¢ a 
apxew €TEepav a€iovvT@V WpmoroyelTe eivat, OUK av, 
bls > n \ / b] 
avopes “A@nvaio, tas UBpews avécyerOe tas TavTOU, 
\ \ \ ’ \ e/ ¢ la) / 3 
as Kata THY ayopay vBp.fev, omovd peTtoiKous, AOn- 
/ , r a a 
vaiovs, Séwv, atayov, Body év trais éxxdAnolass, él 
a U / \ al a 
Tov Bnuatos, Sovrous Kat ex SovAwWY KaXaV avTOD 
/ \ > a > tal > ‘ ‘\ 
Bertiovs Kat éx Bedtlovwv, EpwTdy et patnv TO Se- 
t ? / / » 4 METS £ 
TuwTnpLov @KooounOn. Katadainy av eywye, el y 6 
\ ¢ \ f > / a / 
TATHP O GOS WYETO avTOGEY avTais Tédais eEopynaa- 


trav wev oldev] From here to 
the end of § 68 is not repeated 
in || Timocr., which begins again 
at AdXa vy Ala. 

§ 68. dpuodroyetre...dvécxecbe 
...UBpifev] Each of. these tenses 
has its significance. ‘If you 
(now) acknowledged...you would 
not have endured (in the past) 
the insults he (repeatedly) offer- 
ed.’ Writing dvécxyecde with a 
single augment is certainly de- 
erring too much to the sole 
authority of MS. =: all the 
others retain the usual Attic 
form jvérxecde. 

déwv] Cobet names this pas- 
sage (Nov. Lect. pp. 528—9) as 
one of many where he corrects 
dav &e. In Mise. Crit. p. 526 
he repeats the correction with 
the remark ‘ Dicam de his formis 
alio loco,’ apparently forgetting 
what he had said before. His 
rule could not be put more 
neatly than it is by Shilleto on 
Thucyd. 1. 6, 3 dvadovpmevor: ‘déw 


*(dind) and compounds invariably 


are contracted. Thus 7d dodv 
(literal) is distinguished from 
To déov (metaphorical).’ In Plat. 
Crat. 419 a we have déov xal 
wpédtmov kal AvotTedody Kal Kep- 
5dXeov contrasted with 7d dé to-xor 
kal dotv peyduevov. Ib. 421 6 
70 lov kal 7d péov Kal 7d dodv. In 
Protag. 321 8 the restoration of 
vrodwy for vrd rédwv has greatly 
improved the sense of the pas- 
sage. 
katadalyv dy %ywye] ‘ Yes, I 
should say it was, when your 
father went dancing off with his 
fetters [rather, as R. W., ‘ fetters 
and all’] at the procession of 
the Dionysia.’ K. who adds in 
a note (from the scholiast Ul- 
pian) that ‘at this time the 
prisoners were let out of gaol to 
enjoy themselves, and that An- 
drotion’s father availed himself 
of the privilege to escape.’ In- 
stead of dodpas, étopxnoamevos 
is humorously substituted, in 
allusion to the dancing at the 
festival (G. H. Schaefer). 


70 


, fo A 
pevos Atovvcimy TH Tom. 
TocavTa TO TAOS éoTwv. 


29 A OY” ie Ae 
ovd av éxou Tus ei7rety 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS _ [§§ 69, 70. 


adra &é boa UBpixev 


av aOpowr akiov AaBovtas Sixny THmEpov Trapaderypa 
Touoat Tois adrAoLs, ty wot peTpPLOTEpoL. 

"ArAXAa v7) Alia tadta pév' ToLodTds éotuv, év obs 
meron Tevtat, dra 8 éof & Karas Sv@KnKev’ adra* 


TAAN ob Tw TpoceAHAO TavTA Tpds uas Bore HKL- O15 


i uév om. Z cum TVTQs, sed in = pév ab antiqua manu additum, 
Kk @\\a Kal Bens. cum kr || Timocr. 


S$ 69—78. The melting down 
of the crowns, and recasting them 
as paterae, for which Androtion 
and his friend Timocrates are 
jointly responsible, is an act of 
gross fraud, since there was no 
proper control over the gold 
during the process (70, 71). And 
whereas the inscriptions upon 
them commemorated the gratitude 
of our allies, or Athenian vic- 
tories (72), Androtion has ob- 
literated these and put his own 
disgusting name in their place 
(73). In so doing, he and his 
accomplice have committed three 
disgraceful crimes; the goddess 
they have sacrilegiously despoiled 
of her crowns: in the state 
they have extinguished the glory 
accruing from those deeds, of 
which the crowns while they 
existed were a memorial: the 
dedicators they have robbed of 
no small honour, the credit of 
being grateful for obligations. 
And they take credit for all this 
(74). Again, A. has the tasteless 
vulgarity not to sée that crowns 
are a token of merit, gold plate 
in any other form a merely os- 
tentatious display of wealth (75). 
In his blindness he fails to per- 
ceive that the Athenian people 
have always preferred glory to 
riches: their splendour is dis- 
played in their temples and 


arsenals, not by the gold in their 
vaults. Their imperishable 
treasures are the remembrance 
of their great deeds, a fame that 
will never die (76, 77). How 
completely you, the Athenians of 
to-day, have degenerated from 
your ancestors, is sufficiently 
proved by the fact that Androtion, 
of all people in the world,has been 
chosen for a sacred function as re- 
vay of the Panathenaic vessels 
78). 

§ 69. “Adda vj Ala] Demos- 
thenes’ favourite phrase in in- 
troducing a bit of irony. In 
Plato sometimes d\Ad 67, Lat. 
at enim or simply at. 

To.dTos éorw] To.olTo yeyova- 
ow || Timocr. and so throughout 
with the change to plural forms. 
The general meaning of this 
opening sentence, with its radra 
pev Opposed to ddda 6é, is well 
brought out in K.’s frée trans- 
lation: ‘ But perhaps, notwith- 
standing these political faults, 
there are other things which he 
has managed creditably.’ Nay, 
on the contrary (a))q4)... 

ovTw mpooehnvbe TwavTa mWpos 
vuas] mpocépyoua is not here= 
mpoopépouat ‘to behave’ (G. H. 
Schaefer, Dindorf, Kennedy), 
but, as Shilleto points out on 
Fals. Leg. § 2, is equivalent to 
mwemo\trevrat in the preceding 


P. 615.] 


> ® 5] , ” U : A 
ota év ols aknkoate akios éoTe piceiobat. 


ITAPANOMON. 71 


Ti yap 


/ yo f \ ane) 8 , Been * 
Bovreobe citrw ; Ta TOuTeta ws érecKevaceE, Kal THY 
A / na an 
Tov oTepavev Kabaipecty, i} THY TaV hiada@v Troincw 
\ / > ? \ > 
THY KaANnV; GAN él ToUTOLs y, €L Kal pHndev GAO 
’ “ BA \ Ul A ’ a , 
adiuav éTvXe THY TOAL, Tpls, OVvY amak TEOvavat 
/ n a - \ LES , ES , 
Shcmse9 Ov paveiras Kal yap iepoouNia Kal aceBela 
A an a / 
Kal KotH Kal TaaL Tos dewoTaToLs EeoTiv Evoxos. 
s > ? ¢€ “~ 
OTA pev ovY TOAN @V éywv Vas epevanite Tapa- 
. / Re n \ ra 
Acho’ gyoas dé amroppelv Ta HANA TaV oTEepavev 


sentence: his whole political 
life (ravra) is distinguished from 
a particular part of it (ravra). 
So in Fals. Leg. l. c. dco mpds 
Ta Kowa Sixalws mpocépxovrat, 
and p. 373 § 99=114 éreday Tis 
éaurov teloas Sivacba mpocédOy. 
Compare the Lat. ‘ad rempub- 
licam accedere,’ Cic. Rose. Am. 
1. § 3, in Verr. Act. 11. 1. 12 § 33. 

Kora év ols axnxoare] ‘that 
what you have heard are the 
smallest grounds for detesting 
him.’ é¢' ofs would certainly 
be better Greek, and accordingly 
Cobet Misc. Crit. p. 527 as- 
sumes that Demosth. must 
have written it so, here and in 
|| Timoer. 

Td Toumeta ws éreckevace} § 48 
nN. éemioxevagew ‘to repair’ (espe- 
cially to refit a ship, always 
distinguished from mapackevd- 
few to fit out originally) is eu- 
phemistically put for karaxorrew 
‘to break up.’ 

Ty Twv gdiartav tolnow TH 
Kadnv] ‘his famous manufacture 
of the plates ’K.: but only an 
approximate rendering of 
giadadv is possible. For the 
broad, flat, saucer shape of the 
giddy, see illustrations in Dict. 
Antiq. s. v. Patera. In modern 

works on art the word ‘ patera’ 
is generally left untranslated 


for want of an exact equivalent. 
In Rev. xvi. Luther’s Schalen, 
‘cups,’ comes nearer to the origi- 
nal than the ‘ vials’ of the E. V.: 
and it is the word used by 
Benseler in translating Demos- 
thenes. In the Revised Ver- 
sion ‘bowls’ is substituted for 
‘vials:’ and is perhaps the best 
word that could be used here. 

Tois deworaras écriv évoxos] 
évoxos in the Orators, joined to 
a dative, means (1) ‘liable to’ 
a punishment, as de Fals. Leg. 
p. 404 § 201=223 rais dpais 
évoxos: Lys. 1. Alcib. § 9 rdoas 
Tais keiwévars Snulats évoxos: or 
(2) ‘chargeable with, guilty of’ 
a crime, as here and Antiph. 
Or. 1. § 11 @voxa Te Gory. The 
instances quoted for a genitive 
seem to disappear on examina- 
tion: in Demosth. de Cor. 
Trierarch. p. 1229 § 4 &oxoe 
decug is now read, and in Lys. 
1. Alcib. § 5 €voxos \urorattou ovde 
dechias the dative may easily be 
supplied. 

§ 70. gyoas 8 daroppey ra 
gi\\a] For Androtion to be 
able to allege this, however ab- 
surdly, some at least of the 
crowns could not have been of 
solid gold, but must have re- 
sembled the ‘wreath’ lately 
offered to an English Prime 


71 


42 


KATA ANAPOTIONO® [§§ 71—78. 


\ \ > PS \ \ , v4 yy Ar 2 bs 

Kal campovs eivat Ova TOV ypovoy, daTrEp twy 1) podwy 
’ > 

éyTas, GdX’ ov yYpuciov, cvyYwvevely ETELTEV. KAT 

> \ \ Cal a a 

el wev Tals eiogopais Tov Snuocvov Tapeivar Tpocé- 
e & \i bé x e v4 ? \ 

ypawrev ws 67' Sixatos av, ov Exactos avtuypadeds 
»” » tal ’ / z > \ a Ul 

ewednrev Ececbar TOV EigeveyKovTwY’ éTl Tos TTEpa- 

> “\ 
vous ©, ols KaTéxoTrTEV, ov! TpoTHyarye TAaVTO SikaLoy 


a ? > p OR,’ ev m , / > 
TOUTO, AX avUTOS pHTwpP™, YpYTOYOOS, Tapias, aVTL- 


\ , : / 
ypagevs yéeyover. Kal pny et mev avravT né&lous, boa 
/ n ’ a 3 
TPATTES TH TOL, TAVT@ TioTEVELY, OVK AVY bpwoiws 
of Xx b fie n pee: ee. a > RN ters 8 , 
kKrXET TNS OV Ehwpwa* viv S Ertl Tais eiaghopais 6 Si- 
’ > ery \ \ , > \ Ais Be fal 
Katov €o@ opicas, fn col TitTEVEL, AAG Tots EaUTNS 
Sy / \ / ¢ / 5 vv , \ / 
ovrols THY TOALY, OTTOT ANNO TL TPATT@Y Kal YPN- 
e \ baw) rn 
Hata KiVvaV lepa, wv Evia ovd él Tis HuEeTépas yeveds 
3 / \ / \ ’ \ \ 
avetéO@n, 1 mMpooypatrawevos THY avTny dvdNaKny 
o fal a , ’ « 
QvTep él” THV cichopay haivet, ovK evdnrov ov a 


nn 


1 os dv Bens. cum =TOs. m 6 jjTwp Bens. cum >. 
» qv wept Z Bekk. Bens. cum =Y. 


Minister and declined by him. 

Tov Onubovov mapeivar rpoceypa~ 
ev] ‘added a clause that the 
public slave should be present,’ 
not ‘officer’ as K. We read 
immediately afterwards, 7 col 
TioTEVELY AANA Tols EauTAs SovALS 
tv wodkw. The Snudoro were 
employed, among other duties, 
as avriypageis or checking- 
clerks. Comp. de Fals. Leg. p. 
381 § 129=142: Dict. Antig. 
s. v. Demosii. 

ws 6n dixacos wy] Benseler 
alone follows = (auf allen 
Vieren) in the pointless reading 
av for én. The latter is here 
most appropriate. For the 
readiness with which AN and 
AH are confused, see Cobet 
Nov. Leet, pp. 501, 549. Another 
instance occurs Timocr. § 156. 

pyTwP, XpvooxXoos, Taplas, av- 
trypageds] It was remarked on 


§ 38 that wherever there was a 
Taulas there was also an avti- 
ypagdeds to check his accounts, 
Here Androtion carries a decree 
that the crowns shall be melted, 
superintends the process him- 
self, sends in what accounts he 
pleases to the state, and allows 
no one else to check them. I 
cannot think, with Benseler, that 
tauias because it stands alone 
can only mean the State-trea- 
surer or ‘Chancellor of the Ex- 
chequer’ (§ 35 n.). I understand 
it as raulas ad hoc: the humour 
of the passage lies in A, usurping 
all these functions, not of course 
without some formal authority, 
but by procuring hasty votes of 
the people which, when seen in 
their true light, laid him open 
to a ypaph mapavéuwy. Cf. § 76 
Jin. mad ypayers karaxwvevew. 
§ 71. wy mpocypawaueros.., 


a 


P. 616.] TIAPANOMON. 73 
72 TovT érroinoas ; éy@ pev oiwat. Kal pny, @ avdpes 


"AOnvaio, Kal Kata TavTOSs TOD ypovou cKéacbe ws 
\ \ 2 U a / bd \ e 
KANG Kal CyrAWTA ETTLYPALULATA THS TOAEMS AVEAWY WS 
et n \ \ 9 / a \ e n 
aceBHn Kal Sewa avteTiyéypadev. oipar yap vpas 
r % a“ , al 
dimavtas opav UT0 TéV oTehavan Tais yowviKiot KATw- 616 
, \ a 
Oey yeypappéva “ of cvppaxot Tov Oj pov avdpayabias 
/ 3 lal a 
évexa Kal SiKatoavyns’ 7 “ot cVppaxot apioTetov TH? 
> na A 
“AOnvaia,” Kata Tores “ot Setves tov Shpor, 
p . n a 
cwOévtes umd Tov Symov,’ otov “ EvBoeis éXevOepw- 
bé 2 oe Be a," Be yr? f , q 
évTes €oTepavwcav? Tov dnuov’ [éreyéypat To Trov"|, 
: / ‘74 / > \ a ’ a“ \ 
Tadw “ Kovev amo THs vaupayias THS Tpds AaKedai- 
ToLavTa yap HY Ta Tov oTehavav éTI- 
a \ \ n ‘ 5 
TavTa pev Tory, & Cprov Tonvy eiye 
’ , , A 
nbadviotat KkabaipcOéevTwy TOV 


/ ”» 
[Lov ious: 
‘ , 
73 Ypapparta. 
\ / c a 
Kat prroTiiay viv, 
U a oe. a / > «A ’ > / > / 
otehaver’ emt tais diadais 8 as avT éxelvwy érrown- 
¢ a id / A a r ¢ "A 5 / > 
gato vulv O TropVvos ovTOS", VOpOTiMVOS €7r1jLEOU- 


° ry om. Bekk. cum =. 
1 om. Z Bekk. Bens. 


palver] Not ‘you appear’ but 
‘are found not to have intro- 
duced the same safeguards.’ 
§ 21 n. ° 
§ 72. xourxio.] From the 
resemblance of shape to the 
measure so called, the name 
xolvixes was applied to rings or 
shackles for the legs, as in 
Aristoph. Plut. 276 ai kvjuat dé 
col Bowow | "Tod tod, Tas xolvixas 
kal Tas médas mofovoca, and in 
the scurrilous passage about the 
parents of Aeschines, de Cor. p. 
270 § 129 xolvixas rayxelas éxwv 
kal év\ov, Hence xouwrxides here 
and |j Timocr. are therings which 
served as stands for the crowns. 
Kovwy amo rhs vavpaxlas] The 
battle of Cnidus, 3.c. 394. 
|| Timoer. adds XaSplas amd THs 
év Nag& vavyaxlas, the battle in 


P [éorepdvwoay] Bens, 


* 6 mépvos o’Tos om. Z Cob. cum pr. =. 


B.c. 376, alluded to § 15 above. 
§ 73. & ~yrov—xal piroriular] 
‘which brought you so much 
admiration and honour.’ I do 
not think that ‘emulation’ (K.) 
is here intended. Demosth. 
says of his own crown, de Cor. 
p: 267 § 120 otrw cKads ef kal 
avalcOnros, Aicyivy, wor ov 
divaca Aoyloacbar bri TH perv 
oTepavoupévy Tov adroyv éxet (nov 
6 orépavos, S1rov av dvappyOy, Tov 
dé Trav orepavovyTwy Evexa oup- 
gépovros év TH Oearpw ylyvera 
TO Kjipuvyya: Where the glory of 
the recipient and the emulation 
his rewards kindle are clearly 
contrasted, and ¢7\os is applied 
to the former. For ¢idoTimia 
nearly=riun, below §§ 74, 75, 
Timoer. § 91 zoddds odoruuias 
Tepiatpetrar THS Toews. 


74 


, 


74 KATA ANAPOTIONO®  [8§ 74, 75. 


“ , ’ 0 8s? 39 f a \ e \ A 
pévov éTrounOnoarv®” émuyéypaTtat’ Kal ov TO CMa 
, > ec \ 
WTALNKOTOS OUK E@OLW 01 VOMOL ELS TA LEepa ELoréevat, 
a a > n 
ToUTov Tovvoua €v ToIsS lepois éml TaV hradav ye- 
/ / a a 
ypappévov éotiv. bpotdy ye, ov yap; TodTO Tots Tpo- 
/ c¢ a 
Tépows éTuypaupaciv, ) phirotiplav tonv Exyov vpiv. 
/ 
tpla* tolvuy é« TovTou Ta SewotaT dv Tis dou TeTpa- 
AK > tad \ \ 
yuév’ avtots. Tv wev yap Oedv Tos oTehavous cEeav- 
/ 
AnKact’ THs wodews SE Tov Ehrov ndhavixace Tov x 
a ” ® ¢e t eg . 
Tov épywv, Ov Vropvnua jHoav bytes of oTépavot 
\ 2: > / , b] \ id / \ 
tovs © avabévras So€av ov pixpav adypnvtat, To So- 
“ e x s 10 20 s, lal @ \ 
Kelv ov av ev TADwow e0éreELv pewvnabar. Kal ToL- 
a n \ 
adtTa Kal Tooadta TO TAHOOS Kaka cipyacpévos Ets 
a / 
ToUTO dua avatcOnclas Kal TorApNs TmpoEeAnAVOacL 
ef / e tal a 
OOTE MELVNVTAL TOUT@V WS KAADS avTOis’ SipKnpevar, 
+, ae \ y D> ae a fs ds a , 
@o0 6 pev oletar Ov exeivov tp tudv cwOncec Oat, 
® éronOnoav om. Z Bekk. Bens. |i Timocr. 
t § 74 uncis incl. Bekk. Y avrots Bens. 


erajOnoav|] Omitted in || Ti- 
mocr. and here, I think, better 
away. See various readings. 

Spuoubv ye, od ydp;] Timocr. 
§§ 106, 181. 

§ 74. Timocrates has not 
been mentioned in this speech, 
though Androtion, who was 
doubtless a far more important 
person, figures largely in the 
Timocratea, The sudden trans- 
ition to the plural is therefore, 
it must be admitted, somewhat 
awkward: and there is much 
plausibility in the notion (first 
started by Emperius in his ob- 
servations on Dion Chrysostom) 
that this § is wrongly inserted 
here from || Timoer. It is brack- 
eted by Bekker in his later 
edition, Sauppe, and Benseler: 
rejected by Cobet Misc. Crit. 
p. 528—30,. The latter follows 
Dobree in denouncing the words 


wore péuyynrar—diwKynuévwv as 
doubly spurious, an interpola- 
tion of an interpolation: wore 
péurnvra was first written as a 
dittographia of dof’ 6 per ole- 
tat, ‘deinde reliqua addita ob 
sensum.’ 

Tov <Hrov...Tov éx Trav Epywr] 
‘ The glory resulting from those 
actions, of which’ &c., not ‘an 
emulation fostered by deeds.’ 

ddéav...7d Soxetv] For this 
combination Funkhaenel com- 
pares de Pace p. 62 § 22 ray 
ddgav Tod modéuouv Tod Soxeiy di’ 
abrov (Pidiwmov) xplow eirnpé- 
vat: and de Symmor. p. 178 
§ 1 rod Soxety ed réyew SdEav 
éxpépovrat (where however Dind. 
now reads rod divacOa éyew 
with MS. >). 

6 pev olerae 5’ éxeivoy] i.e. 
Androtion thinks that he will 
be acquitted by you, owing to 


75 


P. 617.) 


ITAPANOMON. 


75 


¢ \ , \ > , a / 
6 O€ mapaxdOnrat Kal ov KaTadveTat Tois TeTpaypé- 


vous. 


ovTm & ov povov eis ypnwata avaLdys, GAXd 


\ / b] c/ > bd Hn) b] a 4 / / 
Kal CKQLOS EOTLY, WOT OUK OLOEV EKELVO, OTL orepavot 


/ a U a 
Mév eiow apeTis onpetov, drarar Sé Kat Ta ToLtadra O17 


/ \ f \ e/ x ‘\ Ss \ 
TOVTOV, KAL OTEPAVOS MEV ATraS, KAY pLKPOS 7H, THV 
” ” A , > , = x 6 
ionv piroTimiav Exel TH heya, ExTapuaTta 6 7 Ov- 

, Dy \ ¢ , a , / A 
fuaTnpla, av pev vTEepBadXAy TO TAN OEL, TWAOVTOU TVA 


the influence of Timocrates, 
while T. calmly sits by and 
does not sink into the earth for 
shame at his performances. 
Anecd, Bekk. p. 151, 22: xara- 
Stout dvti rod alcxvvoua, do- 
t.kq: i.e. followed by a dative, 
as here trois mempayudvos. I 
agree with Benseler and Cobet 
that this is making too much 
of Timocrates, a ‘mere subor- 
dinate’ (ein blosser Gehiilfe) of 
A. In || Timoer. the positions 
are reversed: Timocrates is on 
his trial (6 wér), and Androtion 
(who by this time has already 
been acquitted on the present 
charge, and is perhaps more 
insolent than ever) is his power- 
ful supporter: and the passage 
is thus in its right place. 

§ 75. oKxaids] See the quo- 
tation from de Cor. § 120 in 
§ 73 n.: ‘stupid,’ K. ‘narrow- 
minded’ (bornirt), Benseler. 

ay pev virepBddrd\n TO wAHGEL] 
There are two ways in which 
this and the corresponding 
clause éav 5’ él puxpots ris cep- 
vivnrat may be taken, G. H. 
Schaefer, Funkhaenel, Dindorf, 
and Benseler seem to agree in 
thinking that both clauses refer 
to ‘gold plate’ only, of which 
‘drinking-cups’ and ‘censers’ 
are taken as common types. 
These, if of a certain massive- 
ness, rovrou Tid ddgav mpoce- 
tplyaro rots KexTynmévors (trans- 


lated below): but if a man 
prides himself upon small ones, 
so far from obtaining any credit 
on that account, he is thought 
to be dmeipéxados, wanting in 
taste. Thus mdnfec=peyéber, 
as Schaefer observes, a point on 
which there need be no diffi- 
culty. But surely. this is not 
the notion which a cultivated 
Athenian would have formed of 
amepoxadia. To him the are- 
poxados was the man devoid of 
a true feeling for art, the ‘ Phi- 
listine,’ the man who could not 
‘live up to’ the works of Phi- 
dias and Ictinus. He would 
have applied the name to the 
vulgar rich man with his heavy 
gold plate as readily as to the 
silly man who aped wealth upon 
a small scale. The Greeks were 
singularly free from that wor- 
ship of gold and jewels for their 
own sake, and apart from ar- 
tistic merit or other associa- 
tions (such as those of the 
crowns which Androtion had 
broken up), which has marked 
the Oriental mind from the 
earliest dawn of its literature to 
the days of ‘ Endymion.’ 

The preferable explanation is, 
with K. and R. W., to under- 
stand pixpols of ‘ small matters.’ 
Cups and censers, if exceed- 
ingly numerous, cover their pos- 
sessor with a certain showy 
varnish of wealth (‘wohl ihre 


76 


76 


KATA ANAPOTIONOS [8$ 76—78. 


défav mpocerpiyato Tots KexTnpévots, dav © em put- 
pois Tis ceuvdvntat, TocodT aTéyet TOD TYAS TLVOS — 
dia TavTa TUYEl WoT aTreipoKaros Tpos eokev* elvan. 
ovTOs Tolvuy avedov Ta THs SoEns KTHMATA, TA TOD 
mwAouvTOU TeroinTat piKpa Kal ovy vudv aia. Kal 
avd’ éxely eidev, OTL Tpds pev YpnLaTwV KTHoLW ov- 
devrotrote 6 OHwos éorrovdace, mpos Sé SoEns as ovde 
mpos &v TOV GAN@v. TexunpLov Sé° YpnwaTa pev yap 


TrEioTa THY “EAAHvav ToTé cYOV travO Urép hiro- 


7 > / > / 3? > an > / ’ / 
Tiias avnrocev, eichépwyv & éx Tév idlwv ovdéva 

, y / § ¢ \ / dt-/ Ca bless, 4 
mamTrote’ Kivouvoy uTép So&ns e€éoTn. ad ov KTHLATA 
3 - b) a / \ \ “A vy ¢ , 
adavata avT@ Tepleott, TA perv TOV Epyov H wynuN, 


* v. not. 


Besitzer mit einem gewissen 
glinzenden Firniss yon Wohl- 
habenheit umgeben,’ Benseler): 
but whether more or fewer, they 
are but small matters, and the 
man who prides himself upon 
them is dzepéxados. Andro- 
tion, therefore, has shown 


‘tasteless vulgarity” in melting 


down the wreaths, with their 
glorious associations, and turn- 
ing them into vessels which are 
only so much bullion. 

togoir’ améxe.] Rather roc- 
ovrov améxe, § 2n. 

mpos &dofev] Dindorf alone 
prints this as two words: but if 
with the MSS. we write mpocé- 
dogev, the preposition must still 
be taken separately. Other si- 
milar instances are Pantaen. 
p. 981 § 49 rpocaripeca (where 
see Sandys): Boeot. de Nom. 
p- 1001 § 23 rpocmcetv: Callicl. 
p. 1280 § 29 mpoccvKodarToi- 
ow. I own that I prefer Din- 
dorf’s way of writing all these 
passages divisim. 


Y wémore om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum 2FTOQstv. 


§ 76. rexunpiov 5€] This sen- 
tence, down to é&écrn, occurs 
with some variations in Lept. 
p. 460 § 10. The allusion in 
Xphuara mrelora wore cxwv is 
doubtless to the times of Peri- 
cles: the history of the Olym- 
pieion, not finished till the time 
of Hadrian, shows that after 
the outbreak of the Peloponne- 
sian war Athens had little to 
spend on art and architecture. 

ovdéva muwmore klivdvvov—ééé- 
orn| The best MSS. all omit 
mwmore here, though in || Lep- — 
tines there is no variety of 
reading. For é&éorn with ace. 
compare, besides || Lept., de 
Cor. p. 331 § 319 ovddéva ééi- 
orauac ‘I avoid no one:’ where 
Drake aptly points out that 
éficrawac takes accus. where 
gevyw might be used, dat. where 
elkw, and compares Soph. Aj. 
82 gpovotyta yap vw ode dy 
étéorny bxvw. In Latin excedere 
egredi evadere are all found 
with an accus. 


97 


P. 618.] TIAPANOMON. 77 


\ \ nn , /. Lal PAD / / \ 
Ta O¢ Tov avabnuaTtav Tov eT éxeivols oTaBévTMV TO 
/ / na ¢ 

KAAXOS, TpOTVAALA TATA, O TapVEVaY, cTOAal, VewdooL- 

> % / / OX / / a 

Kol, ovK audopickot Svo ovdé ypuaides TétTapes 7 
lal Uj / nr e\ “4 

Tpels, dyouca éxaoTn pvav, as, dTav cou SoKH, od 
, >] 

Tanw yparpes KaTaywvevelv. ov yap avTtouvs dexa- 

a eh x e a 
TeVvovTEs, OVD A KaTapdcawT ay ot éyOpol TrovodrTes, 


a , \ > \ Py ce a PR arnt) 
| buddys mpartovtes Tas eiopopas, TadT avéecar, ovd 


78 


oloomep* od ypapevor cupBovrors éroALTEVOVTO, AANA 
Todvs éyOpovs Kpatourtes, Kal & Tas TIS av Ed Ppovwrv 
evEatTo, THv TOY eis Omovotay ayovTes, aBavaTov 

L ¢ on / tis r a \ 
KA€OS AUTOV AENOlTTaGL, TOUS ETLTNHOEVOVYTAS* ola cot 
BeBiarar ths ayopas elpyovTes. 

n / > 

dvdpes ’AOnvaior, mponyOnt evnOelas kal padupias 


* oloisrep Z Bens. cum libris. 


dpets 8’ ets TOOT, B 618 


® érirndevcaytas Z Bekk. Bens. cum ZTQs et corr. F, 


tov avabnudrwv—rd Kddos] 
‘the splendour of the (sacred) 
edifices raised to commemorate 
them:’ dva@nua in a rare sense 
of the temple itself, usually of 
its contents, i.e. votive offer- 
ings. 

audoploxot Svo} ‘A pair of 
little jars, or three or four gold- 
en saticers each weighing a 
mina’ K.—rérrapes 7 Tpets, with 
the smaller number last,= 
‘four, or perhaps only three.’— 
Xpvols is explained as= giddy in 
the grammarians (Harpocrat., 
Bekk. Anecd. 316, 14). Ben- 
seler treats it as a diminutive 
(Schélchen); his word for au- 
goploxo (Henkelkriigelchen) pre- 
serves the notion of a vessel 
with handles always conveyed 
by audopeds (=dudipopeds, aul 
and @épew). For the sense of 
dyew compare Timocr. § 129 
Tov dxwakxny Tov Mapdoviov, ds 
Nye Tptaxoctous Sapeckovs: c. Ti- 


moth, p. 1193 § 32 mel@e av- 


Tov 6 TaTnp 6 éuos Tiny amo\a- 
Beiv Trav giarav, bcov yor al 
pidrat. 

§ 77. Sexarevovres] The 
property tax was an elxoory or 
5 per cent. upon the taxable 
cafital (Dict. Antig. s.v. His- 
phora). This, when doubled 
by Androtion’s exactions, be- 
came a dexary or tithe. 

olécmep od] § 64n. 

Thy Todw els oudvoray GyovTes] 
Whereas the tendency of A.’s 
proceedings was to excite dis- 
content and opposition. 

Ths ayopas elpyovres] The 
Atimia, denounced against such 
immorality as Androtion was 
accused of, disqualified from 
speaking in the public assem- 
blies. There is no reference to 
buying and selling in the mar- 
ket-place : no aquae et ignis in- 
terdictio. Cf. Timocr. §§ 60, 
103. 

§ 78. evdnbelas kal paduutlas] 
Der Stumpfsinn und der Sorg- 


78 KATA ANAPOTIONO® TTAPANOMON, 


¢, > XOX la} » / a 
Bor ovdé toradta éyovtes Trapade’ypata tadTa p- 


a > a . 
peta be, adr’ “Avdpotiov viv Toptreiwy émicKevacTns, 


an ; rn ees 
’"Avopotiav, & yf Kal Geol. Kal todT acéBnyua édar- 
al - ral 
tov Tivos Hyeiobe 3 eyo mév yap olpwar Seiy Tov eis iepa 
eiovovta Kal yepviBav Kal Kavdv arouevoy Kal THS 
mpos Tors Oeovs érripereias Tpoatarny écopevoy ovyt 
, b e a > \ e , > \ \ 
Tpoeipnuevov”. nuepav aptOuov ayvevewv, AANA TOV 
Biov ayveveévat Tovovtav- ériTndevpatev ola TOUT@ 


BeBiorar. 


> -wy Bens. cum libris. 


losigkeit, ‘stupidity and care- 
lessness.’ This bit of plain 
speaking was, it will be remem- 
bered, to be uttered by Diodorus, 
not by the young author of the 
speech, 

routelwv émicxevacTis| §69n. 

’Avdpotiwy, @ yh Kal Geoi] For 
the stinging repetition (Epana- 
diplosis, Blass p. 153) of the 
man’s name, comp. Aristocr. 
p- 690 § 210 kal Xapidnporv «i 
xpH ppoupeiv Bovreverar; Xapl- 
Onuov; oluo. ‘Often quoted,’ 
says Prof. Mahaffy Gr. Lit. 11. 
347 n. 

kal rovr’ acéBnua éXarrov Tlvos 
yyecbe;] Sic resolvendum: 
TouTo Tivos doeBnuaros é\aTTov 
: éBynua ayeicbe ; G. H. Schae- 
er. 

xepviBwv] The doubt is as 
old as Harpocration whether 
this is from xépBor the vessel 
or x¢épvuy the holy water. The 


Scholiast takes it of the former: 
ob Tov Vdaros GANA THY ayyelwr, 
and so Benseler. K. understands 
it of the latier: but the point is 
unimportant. For xavwyv see 
Dict. Antiq. s.v. Canephoros. 
mpoepnuévoy tuepwv aprOuor] 
Reiske’s correction for mpoe:py- 
pévwv, received by all editors 
except Benseler. This critic 
argues ingeniously that not 
merely the number of days, but 
the particular days for cere- 
monial purity were prescribed : 
and defends the reading of the 
MSS. On the other hand, the 
tendency of copyists to make 
every word agree with the near- 
est to it, and irrespective of 
the sense, is a well known and 
fruitful source of error. In 
|| Timocr. the best MSS. read 
taxrov, the rest as here mpoe- 


pnuevwr. 


KATA TIMOKPATOY2. 


AIBANIOY TIIO@ESIS. 


Avddwpos pév xavrad0a 6 KaTHyopos’ KaTnyopet 
dé vouov pdra diravOpwrov, duoTep and THs aitlas 
kal THS TOD yeypabdTos yvouns SiaBadrrew avTov 
Teipatar. éottd 0 vowos 6 Tod Tiwoxpatovs roLod- 
Tos, et tive “A@nvaiwy ér’ oddrnpate Snpoolw mpoc- 
Tetiuntat Secpod 7 Kal TO RowTov mTpoctimnOein, 
efetvar avT@ 7 GAM UTrép avTOD éyyuNnTas KaTaTTN- 
cavtt Tov OpAHpaTos, ods dv 6 Sipwos yetpotovncn, 
nv evTos pntns mpobcopias éxticew, adpeicPar Tod 
Seopod’ éav Sé érictavtos TOD ypovou py éxTLcOA TO 
OprAnua, TOV pev ekeyyunBévta SedécOar, Ta dé 
éyyuntov Snuociav eivat THY ovclay. TodTor aiTLa- 
TAL TOV VOMOV 6 KaTHYOpOS OVX UITép TOD KoLVOD ye- 
ypapOat, arr vrrép “Avdpotiwves kal TravKérou kai 
Medaverov. odtos yap, dyoi, weupOévtes cis Ka- 
plav mpecBevtat Kal mré€ovTes €v TpinpeEl, TreptTre- 
advtes Navxpatitais avOporrous éumdopois, apethovto 
avTav Ta ypypata. €10 of Navxpatiras péev édOov- 

Argument. xdvrad0a] Aswell  -yveuns, ‘the intention of its pro- 
asagainst Androtion. Didthese poser.’ 
two speeches stand together in mpodecuias] Dict. Antig.s.v. 
Libanius’ copies? Prothesmia. 


rns airtas] ‘the motive’ of the mpecBevral] See § 12 of the 
law, nearly=rTys Tov yeypapéros speech, 


80 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [ARGUMENT. 


\ la c \ 
tes “AOnvafe tov Shwov ixérevov, 6 d5é Shwos éyvw 
/ > \ / \ \ na ] an 
Torkéuia eval TA YpHnMaTa, Kal un Setv atrodoOAvat 
nr Jf ’ 
Tois €umropois. ToUTwY Oé OUTw yevoméevwr ApyéBuos 
\ / € ’ a \ 37? @ + 
kat Avobeidns of Tpinpapyot THs veds, ef’ Hs Erdeov 
ot wept Tov AvdpoTiwva, eiceTTpaTTOYTO TA YpnmaTa. 
c be >] na \ ’ > / ” > ] \ ‘6 
WS O€ ExElVOL EV OUK eEhayvnaay EXOVTES AUTA, OL 95 
\ a3 ¢ , 4 ea \» a 
mpeaBevtal Sé wporoyouv Eye avTa, kal ee. wav 
lal , x rn Cal 
xpHua KaTaBadrAeEL  Tols vowots UaromimteL Tots 
fal ’ U \ / \ an \ nm 
TOV opevAovTaV Ta Snudota, Sid TodTO, dyol, ToDTOV 
, rn f 
tov vouov Tipoxpatns BonBodyvta éxeéivors EOnxev. 
6 pévtot Timoxpatns éxtetixévat pnol Ta ypyipata 
\ ae / \ n b] nr > ¢ 
tovs wept “Avdpotiwva, cal Sirov évredOev civar ws 
ovK éxelvwn EveKa TOV VOmov eiaéhepEv AUTOS. KATN- 
rat dé ¢ A 10 \ Mv n / < / \ 
yopet dé 0 Atodwpos Kal ddrAXO Tod vépou' THY TE yap 
, ’ a / al 
Gécw avtod péwdhetar ws yeyovviay mapa Tovs vo- 
¢ 4 ’ r 
hous, Kal vTevavtioy elvar Tois apxalows pyoi, Kal 
>] , Qn Qn ! 
aovppopoy Tots Kowols éTLOElKVUC LY. 


ETEPA THO@ESIS. 


Tlovéuou tvyydvovtos “AOnvaiow mpos Bacidéa, 

\ lal \ / b] / / nan 
KaTa ToUTov Tov xypdvov éypadn Whdicpa cira 
Trolwy ToAEuiov elvat Kal yivecOat TA Tipnpara 


otk épdvncav exovres] Liba- 


constitutional rules; (3) impo- 
nius probably means, as a clas- 


litic. 


sical writer would have meant, 
‘were proved not to have’ the 
money, not ‘did not appear.’ 
Androt. § 21. But in the best 
Greek we should not find zap 
xpyua for ravra, ‘everything.’ 
mapa Tovs vdmous...vmevayTiov 
...acuppopov| So in the Andro- 
tion, A.’s motion to crown the 
senate is attacked on the same 
three grounds as (1) illegal, lia- 
ble to a ypagd7 wapavépwr; (2) a 


violent subversion of established _ 


SecondArgument. This writer’s 
Greek, and his judgment also, 
are greatly inferior to that of 
Libanius, 

éypadn whdicua] As if the 
decree had been made for the 
occasion, and the destruction of 
the enemy’s commerce were not 
a regular incident of naval war- 
fare! The use of raév kdoradv 
for ‘the captures’ shows a want 
of command of the language. 

gia tAolwy} ‘that the enemy’s 


ARGUMENT.| KATA TIMOKPATOTS, 81 


Tav KoTov Synuocia. Mavowndos, tis Kaplas ca- 
TpamTns, Tas mépav vngovs nodiker. KateBowv ot 
Brarropevo, kat tors ~AOnvaiovs émexadodvTo. 
édoke dia mpécBeav téws aitidcacbat tov Kapa. 

, i > / \ / \ 
Téutrovaw ovv Avopotiwva cai Meddverov kai 
Tavcétnv mpos tov apxyovta Kapias Mavceandor, 

\ n >] / v \ ’ \ ¢€ ’ nr 
Tov THs Apreuiolas advipa kai aderdor, os adixodvTa 
TAS VyTOVS aiTtacopmévous, Kai Bacthet yapifopevor, 
8 > wv n b] / \ me e A. 

l OV KAKWS €7rOlEL TOUS KAANVAS. OUTOL Vt TrEpt-~ 
tuyovtes Navxpatitixn Aiyirtua éxyovon dopria 
/ \ ' \ l ’ f \ 
(Svexoprfov dé Tovtouvs Tors mpécBeus "ApyéBtos Kat 
Avowbeidns tpinpapyot) Katayovow eis tov Iletpaca 

\ € U \ / / n 3 / 
THY ONKACA. Kal AOYoV Yyevouévwy Tois AiyuTrTiots 

\ \ Lal \ e / , \ @ > / \ 
mpos Tov Ohmov Kal ixetelas, ovdév ArTov expliOn Ta 696 
XpHpata civat Snwoota ws Todeuiwv ovT@v Tav AJ- 
yurtiov. vouou Sé mpootattTovTos TOY YpynTameEvov 
Snpocios ypnuacw ém éviauTov bdov SiTAacla TadTa 
Siddvat, katacyovTes of TpégBeis obTOL TaXavTa| évvéa 
Kl TPLAKOVTA Vas TW aTre“TrOARODEeVTMV hopTioV éx 

n \ ¢ / > / a / \ A 
THS vews vTEvOvVOE éyivovtTe TO Snuociw Kal TO Se- 

/ U 
TRaciw. amavioTnTos S€ ypRu“aTwV KaTacyovons 

\ a . rn U ’ 

Tov Onpov, “Apictopav tis Snuaywyds éypawre W7- 

¢ / \ a“ ’ Ul a / \ 
hicpa éhécbat Enrntas tov oherdcvtav TH TOAEL Kal 
aTroTreipamévov Suarabety, Kal TovTOUS pyvuEWw. €un- 
vusev Evxtnwav 6 mpos Avopotiova pixp@ mpocbev 


vessels should be lawful prizes, 
and the proceeds of the captures 
after valuation become the pro- 
perty of the State.” R.W. The 
form cid ‘right of seizure, re- 
prisals,’ is to be distinguished 
from gida, prizes or captured 
property. It occurs c. Lacrit. 
p- 927 § 13, p. 931 § 26. 

Tas mépay vnoous] ‘opposite’ 
or ‘adjacent’ islands, not ‘be- 


W. D. 


yond.’ The Scholiast mentions 
Cos and Rhodes, and (less accu- 
rately) Chios. 

T@ durraciy] G.H. Schaefer 
suggested rov durdaciov. So be-. 
low 1. 20 Bekker points out that 
wdecrov ought to be dpdev, and 
p. 697. 18 dA’ of ye Tov pH 
ought to be add’ ovv Tov ye un. 
But it seems hardly worth while 
to correct this writer’s Greek, 


6 


82 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [ARGUMENT. 


? , ‘ \ \ U ” > / 
ayovirdpmevos, vuvi dé mpos Timoxparny, éyew Apyxeé- 
lal 4 / 
Biov cat Avoibeidny éx ts Aiyuttias éXKabos Ta- 
> , X U a »” \ / 
Nava évvéa Kab TpiaKxovTa pvas. éyparve Se Sndovote 
dhevryov wey THv éx TOD Tpopavods mpds ’Avdpotiwva 
lal al > 
payny, dia S& THS TOY TpINpdpywv pYHwNs ovdEV 
a / 
nTTov émiBovrevov TO Avdpotiwm. Svadicacias Sé 
, ral , ¢ 
ryevomevns Tois mpéaReot pos Tovs TPLNPAapyous, NT- 
TnOncav ot mpéac Bets Kal Shevrov TA Ypypuata. Tpoc- 
\ , fa) 
TATTOVTOS S€ Vo“ou TOY odeirovTa émt Tod SevTépou 
BI] n / bd x b, / BA a aA 
éviautov Sedéa0at, Ews av extion, Ewerrov TO Seopo@ 
Kal oi mpéaBers KaOuTroBarrcobat. év 5€ TO Kapa 
TOUT® apxopéevov TOD SevTépov eviavTod, év @ Kal 
a \ / > ad 4 , 
SeOjnvar tors mpéoBers éypnv, éypatre Tipoxparns 
vomov TOLODTOY, El Tit TOV OdetrorvTaV. Te Snpoci 
Seopov mpootetiuntat KaTa vomov } Kata Whdiopa 
Kal TO NoLTrOV TrpoT TiO, eEcival AUTO KATATTHOAaVTL 
an \ Ss ‘ / ¢ 5) Lal 
Tpels eyyuntas 7 wny éexticery, ods av o SHpmos yetpo- 
, 247 f) a Se oS 33 Ay om , ewe 
tovnon, adiecOat Tod Secpod édy dé py éexticn avTos 
x» fae | \ \ \ b] bé & bé Q a oe 
7) of éyyuntat, Tov pev éEeyyunbévta Sedéo0a, Td 5é 
val / 3 al 
éyyuntav Snmociav civat tHv ovolav. TovTov TOD 
vopov ypadny amnvéeyxavto Atodwpos cal Evxetnpewv 
¢e Ud Y. 2 ae / 3 / 
6s Tapavouou Kal adixov Kal acvuddpov. ’Avépotiov 
dé cal TrAavKétns cat Merdvwros, cvviévtes 80 av- 
\ A x ‘ t 3 / 
tovs yeyevnobar thy ypadny, KataBaddovew évvéa 
TaXravTa Kal TpiaKxovta pds, lows pméy ovK av KaTa- 
Badortes, c¢ un Tv ypadny éméSoray of Katnyopot, 
KaTnyope: Tolvuy Kuntar 
159. In reality a state debtor, 


whether farmer of the taxes or 
not, might be imprisoned at any 


/ 9 7. 
Opas 0 ovv KaTéBarov. 


diaditxacias] See § 13 of the 
Speech. 


él Tov devrépov éviavroi] 


Boeckh points out that the 
writer, whom he inadvertently 
calls Libanius, has confused the 
actual law with the proposal of 
Timocrates, P. E. book iii. note 


time in certain circumstances; 
Schoemann, Antiq. p. 451 E. T. 
The point will be further dis- 
cussed in the notes to the 
Speech (see §§ 2, 39 f., 50). 


697 


ARGUMENT.| KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 83 


kat Avodwpos, pacxovtes ev Sid Tovs tpéaBets ye- 
ypabOat Tov vomov’ ei Oé Kal éEéticav ev TH peTakd 
“pov, Sedouévns THS ypahys TobTO éroincav, waTE 
ovdev 
dé nrrov é&eraver TOV Vopov 6 PHTwp ws Kal KaT GdNoOV 
TpOTrOY EYOVTA KAK@S* Kal yap Tapavouws TeOcicAal 
dynot kal vrevavtiws Exew Tols vomows, Kal GAs 
adicely Kal Bratrew, Sv Ov TpootaTTel, THY TOALD. 


/ 
TV Tpoaiperiv TOV vouobérov irraitiay eivat. 


\ an a \ &.€ / na / , / 
dua TadtTa your Kal ai vTroécets TOD Adyou Svo, pia 
\ ¢ \ \ 4 / i f Dee 
poev OTe Sua Tovs mpéecBers yéeypamrai, Etépa SE Ste 

al / 
UtevayTios Tois vopois Kal érri€nutos Kal dédcKos. 
c/ >? PANERA > a ¢ / \ : er 
@ote et edvvato éxduyeiv 0 Tiwoxparns tv aitlav 
a \ \ \ , , > ee | a 
TOU pr) Ova TOS TpEeTPeELs yeypadhevat, AAN ovv ye TOD 
\ \ 9S > 6 / &. 280) \ \ 
fn Twovnpov eivar ov dSiadevferar. edvvaTo péev yap 
an a ¢ / 
Tov vouwoétov Katnyopeitv 0 Aodwpos, bts movnpov 
e \ 
éypavre vowov Kal UrrevavTiov Tos vomols, Kal pKerev 
rn a ‘ a“ \ 
dv avt@ Tpos UTOOEcw TadTa’ viv O€ Kal THY KaTa 
Tov mpécBewv TpoceiAnde SiaBorHs Evexa Tod vopo- 
/ ¢ \ ta ge / n > / Ti ae ” 
Oérov. 1 pev ody UToVects THS aitias, dv Hv EOnke 
Tov vomov, otoxacTiKn’ EnTetrat yap et Sia Tovs 
, ” RN ee \ \ \ D 
mpéaBes EOnxey ) ov* 4 Sé KaTa TOY Vvomov Tpay- 
\ n 
patixyn’ KaSorXov yap tadca KaTnyopia pntod mpay- 
¢ nA O\ , 8 oy 
pntov é réyw ove && 
e c / n cf > a IA\ 
ovmep Erepov te Enteiral, oTrEp ev oTOYaTMe, OSE 


patixny amepyatverat crac. 


wore THY Mpoalpecw] ‘so that 
the purpose of the mover of the 
law was (equally) blameworthy.’ 
In Attic writers 6 vouobérns would 
hardly mean any one but Solon, 
vouobérac the legislative com- 
mittee selected from the He- 
liastic body (see § 21): here it 
should have been rov rdv vouov 
ypdyarros, as in § 28, 

ai vmobécers Tov Aoyou dvo] 
‘the questions argued in the 
speech are two, one (of motive) 


/ 


that the law was proposed for 
the benefit of the ambassadors, 
the other (of fact) that it is 
illegal, hurtful in its effects, and 
unjust.’ Compare the end of 
Libanius’ Argument. The for- 
mer is the vrodéots THs airias, 
and as such a matter of conjec- 
ture(sroxacrixy): for the latter 
see the next note. 

Trica karnyoplia..cracw] ‘every 
charge against a written docu- 
ment (in English law, ‘of re- 


6—2 


698 


84. KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


na 9? , > l4 A: 59 ef 2 
ToD avahepopévou els Téexvnv Kal éeEovolav, WoTrEp év 
al \ \ a / ¢ 
avTirmyer. €éxel pev él Tois exBeBnKkoow 7 Kpicts, 
> \ n al BJ \ / \ an , 
év O€ TH TpayuaTiKh él pmédXXovoL. Kal Sei yeypa- 
\ 
h0at TO pyntov év vomois Kal év Whdicpacw. éoTt 
A / 
Toivuy TovTov Tov AOyou Kedharaa Técoapa, ev péev 
, a s 
TO vomimov, 0 Siunpntat Six7y, eis TE TO TPdTwTOV Kal 
/ > 
eis TO TPaypa, TouTécTL els avTOV TOY VoLOV, dTTwS 
a Ld is 
évaytios éoti Tois vomots, Sedtepov TO Sixavov, TpiTov 
A , é > , / \ \ v4 
TO cuphépor, OTL émufnu.os, TEeTapTov TO duvaTor, O7t 
Kal aouvatous émitatTes Tpakes. 1 Kplvopwévn ovv 
¢e , | ee cf ae a / \ \ 
vmobecis €oti attn n év Tols Keharalos. Tv yap 
7 / ¢e U n 
Kata Tov TpécBewv vToGcow ev TH KaTacTace. Kal 
‘al ¢ 
mapexBacet TéDeixe StaBorns Evexa Snrovote. ézrevd:) 
yap 6 vomos Soxet hiravOpwrdtatos eivat, Tov Seopav 
> \ U x4 > / a \ \ » 
adueis, ToUTou évexa avTéOnke TrEioTa ev Kal adda, 
\ \ , n ¢ / 
padriota O€ Ta Sv0 TadTa, THY TE UTOOEaW THY KATA 
7 me Ae / 
Tovs mpéa Bets, wa TH VTOVOia Ta’TH TOV aKpoaTny év 
\ my om 
UTowia Sovs Kata Tod avTidixou Telon WS TOV VOmoV 
dv aicypoxépdecav TeOerKoTos UTEp PHTOpwY Kal TrOAL- 
/ ¢ , \ os." 
TEVOMEVOV, APTATAL TA KOLVA Trpoatpovpévar, Kal TO 
3 ? a 
dovpopopov, €v @ aTrocTepjoal THY TodW aTavToV 
Toév oprAnmatwv BovreTar’ Kal TO ddiKov, ev @ OTL 
mpos O€ TO 
\ cr > \ ' > > ved 
OuvaTov, OTe et Kal €BovropueOa, ovK Hv SuvaTov 
n \ fal 
avaipobytat yap THs ToXwTelas of Kavoves. fn a- 
a \ \ \ / U 2 , 
yvodmev € OTL TO Lev VOpLmov Kepadatov évTEAoTATA 


avakiows Secporais THY yapw Sdidwor, 


[ARGUMENT. 


cord’) raises a question of fact.’ 
For oraois cf. note on Androt, 
Argum. p. 596, 8, where éyypa- 
gos corresponds to pyrev here. 

avTiAnyer] ‘objection.’ 

Karaorace.] ‘statement of the 
case.’ 

TO ev voutmov Kepadaov] The 
most sensible remark which this 
grammarian has yet made: ‘the 


legal argument is worked out 
very completely,’ because it is 
the strong point: the other and 
weaker pleas are purposely jum- 
bled together. In the Crown, 
on the contrary, the question of 
law is the weak point of the 
orator’s defence; and it is care- 
fully hidden away in the middle 
of the speech, and lost in the 


699 


P. 700.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 85 


~ / \ \ 
elpyactat, TO 5é Sixatov Kal TO cupdhépov Kal TO dv- 
\ \ \ , 
VaTOV GAANAOLS TUMTAEKETAL. Kal TO pEev TUpEdépov 
/ 
év TovTos éotl TO Tponyovpevor, KatacKevaterar Sé 
la) la) a r ‘ 
did Te Tov Sikalov Kal Tod adixov Kal Tod advyaTou 
fal \ us » ate, a 8 7 ae \ \ 
Tav yap GOLKOV Kal aguppopoy. TWO AUT@ Kal Trepl 
a 4 af \ > f 
Tov aduvatouv Bialerat ypjabat NOyw' 0 yap advvarov 
Dro 6n Kal acv L émevdn T 
dynot, TovUTO On Kal agvedopov. Kal éeTreLon ‘Tipmo- 
fal U a / U4 
KpaTns ToAvs é€oTL TH hitavOpwria Tov vouov ypa- 
eA be | eS," \ é¢ > / a } \ 
pevos, attn O€ émlt TO Sixatov avadépoito av, dia 
fal / nm 2 , £ 
tovto Anpoocbévns Travtayod To dcuuhopw KéypnTat, 
\ ’ an 1 Cae / / a , 
Setxvds eTtBrAAB) Kal emiCnpmsoy TUYYaVOVTA TH TOAEL 
TOV VOMOV. 





la! \ bl] a > \ a / 
Tod pév aydvos, & avdpes Stxactal, TOU TapoVToS 700 
997) = - Pee. 3 U > lal ¢ v , > 
ovd’ av avtov oiwat Timoxparny eitreiy Ws altos éotw 
/ \ 
XPNMAToOV yap 
b] ~ / > a / ‘ f 4. 
OUK OALY@V aToaTepnaat Bovdopmevos THY TONAL, Tapa 


Bld > lal * ’ \ e lal 
AXXAOS TLS AUTO TWANV avVTOS AUTH. 


/ , 
TAVTAS TOUS VOMOUS VOMOV EionVEyKEV OUT EemrLTNOELOY 
oo / > 9 Nea \ ee Se ar 
ovTe dixatov, @ dvodpes StxacTal’ Us Ta ev ArN boa 

a a \ 
Avpaveltar Kal YEipov EXEL TA KOWWA ToLnTEL, KUPLOS 
° y Lal 
ei yevnoeTal, Taya 67) Kal’ Exactov aKovovTes e“ovd 
, a \ \ 
pabnoeabe, év 5’, 0 pwéyotov éyw Kal mpoxeipoTaTov 
¢ “~ n b , / \ ¢ / 
TpOs UsLas ELTrElV, OVK AaTrOTpeWomaL* THY yap VweTepav 


blaze of splendid rhetoric. 

[§§ 1—16. Introductory]. §§ 
1—5. Exordium: demerits of 
Timocrates (diaBory Tov mpoow- 
mov, Schol.) §§ 1—3: public im- 
portance of the case (avEnots Tov 
mpayuwaros), §§ 4, 5. 

$1. Timocrates has only him- 
self to thank for this prosecution. 
From purely selfish motives he 
introduced a law in violation of 
all the existing laws which was 
neither expedient nor just, and 
the effect of which, if it is allow- 
ed to pass, will be immense pe- 
cuniary loss to the state. 


Tov pév ayavos] The Scho- 
liast observes that this név has 
no 6é corresponding to it. Itis 
in reality repeated at ro wey ody 
mwpayua (end of § 5) and answer- 
ed by “Iva & vucav pnicis Oav- 


wag. Pie 19 
amorpéYou.a] ‘hesitate, shrink 
from:’ a better reading than 
dmoxpuyoua (yp.2r). G. H. 
Schaefer compares the conclud- 
ing words of Prooem. 23, p. 
1434: xdv vets ur meicOnre, 
ovx amorpéWoua rNéyew. Cf. be- 
low, §§ 104, 200, where there is 
the same variety of reading. 


86 KATA TIMOKPATOT> 


[8§ 83—5. 


a a ? , \ / , U \ 

arnpov, nv opwpmoKoTes TEpl TavTwY hEepeTe, AvEL Kat 
a a h Jor 

motel TOV pndevos aElav O TouTOUI vomos, ovy iva KoLW I, 


TL THY TOL OdEeArnon (Tas yap ; bs Ye, & SoKel cUVE- 


\ / , n n 

VEL THY TONTElaV, TA SiKacTNpLa, TADTA AKUpA TroLEl 
- ’ Lal Lal 

TOV TpooTinuaToY TOV* éml Tois adiKnMacLW eK TOV 
/ ¢ / > > & a \ / 4 a 

VOMOV WpLopLéevOV) GAN iva TaV TOdVY YpovOY Lpmas 


\ > / \ \ a ¢ / 
TWWES EKKEKAPTTOMEVOV KAL TOANA TOV VETEpwY Ounp- 
/ S aA / pe oN 
TAKOT@V Nd a KrETTTOVTES havepas EAnbOncay KaTa- 
n \ Ul n 
3 Odor. Kal TocoVT paov oT idia TiWas OepaTreveuv 


a om. Z v. not. 


§ 2. The most obvious objec- 
tion to T.’s law is, that it de- 
prives the courts of the (discre- 
tionary) power of awarding fur- 
ther penalties for wrongful acts, 
Not for the sake of any advantage 
to the state, that is impossible, 
but that the clique of those who 
fatten upon your plunder may 
not be compelled to disgorge. 

TGY TpocTinuaTwr Tav émt] 
The reading is greatly improved 
by the addition of the second 
tov, showing that the construc- 
tion is dxupa Tay mpooTiunuaTur, 
‘unable to enforce their aggra- 
vations of punishment’ (Straf- 
verschirfungen, Benseler) as in 
§§ 79, 102, 191: therwise rap 
mpooT....wpitpévwv would be a 
rather awkward gen. absolute. 
The Athenian law allowed the 
state debtor thirty days to find 
the money before execution was 
levied, and provided that the 
amount should be doubled after 
the ninth Prytany. In the in- 
terval there was a discretionary 
power to imprison where default 
was to be feared, vested in the 
law-courts according to Demo- 
sthenes: Schoemann says in the 
Council (Senate), Antiq. p. 451. 
The subst. rpocriunua seems to 


occur only here and in the 
grammarians Pollux and Har- 
pocration: I prefer the render- 
ing ‘additional penalty’ to the 
simple ‘penalty’ (K.). According 
to Reiske, Ind. Dem. s.v., rpoo- 
Tyway may ‘often’ be understood 
in the same sense as riwayv: but 
he fails to prove this. His most 
plausible instance is in § 103 of 
this Speech, édv tis d\@ KAoT7s 
kal un Tin Oavarov, mpoorimav 
att@ décuov: where however see 
note. 

krérrovres pavepas EXnpOncar] 
The allusion is not to the cap- 
ture of enemies’ property, called 
kXor7 at the beginning of the 
Second Argument; but to the 
fact that the ambassadors ad- 
mitted the possession of the 
money (below, § 13 n.). 

§ 3. His task has been easier 
than mine: he has been bribed 
to bring in his law, and what 
is more, paid beforehand; while 
I stand up for your rights, not 
only without hope of reward, 


.but at the risk of losing 1000 


drachmas. 

Oeparrevev] ‘ pay court to,’ K. 
Rather perhaps ‘study the in- 
terests of,’ ‘watch for oppor- 
tunities of aiding :’ as in de Cor. 


P. 701.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 87 


ee. , 5 See sf Basa e \ 
) Tov vuetépwv Sixaiwv” rpoictacbat date ovTOS MEV 
54 3 / \ b) n 
éxel Tap éxelvwv apyvplov Kal ov mpoTEpoy ToODTOV 
t b) n \ , 
elonveyKeVv UTEP AVTOY TOV vomov, éwol S ev yxiALats 701 
¢ \ ¢ Lal ¢ / " a b] , na na 
vmép Uuav oO Kivdvvos’ TocovTOY aTéyw Tod AaPelV 
¢ n ae A \ > a 
Tt Tap vuwv. €l@Oact per ovv oi TWOAXNOL TOV TPaT- 
TELY TL Tpoalpoupev@V TAV KoLVaV réyeLY Ws TADT 
¢ on > ’ 
Upiv oTrovdaloTaT éoTl Kai pariot akiov mpocéyewv 
¢ \ e x b) 
TOUTOLS, UTEP WV AV AUTOL TUYYaVwoL TrOLOUpEVOL TOUS 
\ J / \ lal 
ACyous. éy@ 0, elrep Tivi TovTO Kal dAAw Tpocy- 
/ a an 
KOVTWS EelpnTal, Vouifw Kapol VOY apuoTTeEt eiTrety, 
an \ ,’ lal an U a 

Tov yap dvtTav ayabav TH TONE Kal TOD SynmoKpa- 

/ 2 / 5 ¢ bu n / 
Toupévnv Kal édevOépav civat WS GAO TL THY VOmoV 
Tepl 

a , a ¢ rn lal 

Toivuy avTov TovTOU voY vulv éoTL, TOTEpOY Set TOvS 


> , , D) m~ OA 7 > A 5 
ALTLMTEPOV e€OTLy, ovo av €VQA €ELTTELV Olas. 


\ ”v / \ et a > a ‘ , 
fev AAXOuS VOmoUS OVS ETL TOs adiKODaL THY TOALY 
c a ’ , Rip 5 t \ t A 
Duets aveypaate, akvpous civat, Tovde Sé KUptov, 


> Sucaiws Bens. cum Dr, 


p. 332 § 322, rds rimds, Tas du- 
vaotelas, Tas evdotias THs ma- 
tpldos Oeparevew, ravras avgew: 
and de F. L. p. 411 § 226=250, 
rots Ta Pidlamou mpdyual’ ypn- 
pévors Oeparrevecv. 

év xtAlas] Androt. §§ 26, 28. 
Below, § 7. 

Trocolrov améxw] Androt. § 


n. 

§§ 4, 5. When, in accord- 
ance with the usual practice of 
public men, I insist upon the 
importance of the matter in 
hand, this is no mere figure of 
speech; for we all attribute our 
freedom and prosperity to the 
law, and the question now be- 
fore you is, whether all the other 
statutes against public offenders 
are to be invalidated, and this 
one to be established, or this 
to be repealed and the others to 


remain in force, 

§ 4. eidPacr uev otv] Com- 
pare the opening words of Isocr. 
Or. 3 de Pace: “Amayres pev 
elwbace ol mwapiovres év0d5e TaoTa 
wéywTa pda Kerr elvat kal wdduora, 
omoudiis diva ry mode, wepl ay 
av avrol Mewar oupBovdevo ev 
ov bay GXN ef kal wept a\\wy 
TW TPAyUaT wv Npmoce TOLAUTA 
m poevmrely, Ooxel pot wpérew Kal 
mepl Tav vor mapovr wy évrevOev 
woncac0a ty apxyv. If these 
passages stood alone, thé re- 
semblance is no more than may 
be expected in an oratorical 
commonplace: but Funkhaenel 
(in Zeitschr. fiir Alterthumsw. 
1837 p. 487) has collected seve- 
ral instances in which it is 
clear that Demosth. imitated 
the older orator. 


§ 5. dveypayare] In the 


[S$ 6, 7. 
ie / ‘ rn \ r \ U4 \ , 
TouvavTiov ToUTOV pev ADoaL, KaTA yopav Sé péveww 
al ae, al tilde" 5 5 e a 
Tous axXous édv. TO pey ovv mpayua, Tepl ov Set 
fal e al lal e rn 
vov vpas yvovat, os év Keharaiw Tis av eltrot, TOOT 


88, KATA TIMOKPATOTS 


éotiv. 
6 "Iva 8 tudv poets Oavpatn ti bn ror’ eyo pme- 
Tpiws, OS y¥ éuavTov TelOw, Tov adXov ypovoy BEBiw- 
a ’ al val 
KOS vov év ayeot Kal ypadais Snuoolas éFeralopat, 
Bovropat puxpa mpos vuas eitrety’ Eotar O€ TAdT 
St v ce a U > \ \ > ie 5 "AO 
ovx amo° ToD mMpayuatos. eyo yap, @ avdpes “AOn- 
lal / o 2 y lal X , 
vaiow, tpocéxpova’ avOpor@ Trovnp® Kai diratrex9n- 
lal a oe. nr 
pove Kal Oeois éyOpe@, @ TeXevTHoA OAN TpoTéKpovTeEV 
¢ / 3 / / \ / & Ud 
7 TOS, AvdpoTimva AEYH. KAL TOTOVT@ CELVOTEpA 
© dro Z Bekk. 


literal sense, ‘written up’ in 
some public place, as the laws 
of Solon were on the doves or 
xupBets (Dict. Antiq. s. v. Axo- 
nes). Cf. below § 23, dvaypayas 
eis NevKwpa. . 

TO ev ovv mpayua...TovT’ éo- 
tiv] ‘Well, this is the case?’ 
pev repeated from rod péev aya- 
vos § 1, and answered imme- 
diately by wa 6é. 

§§ 6—8. Motives of the pro- 
secution: Androtion has not yet 
been punished for the wrongs he 
has done the state, nor satisfied 
my revenge for his private in- 
juries. 

§ 6. “Iva & tuov pnéels Oav- 
pagn] The Scholiast here points 
out the resemblance to the 
opening words of Isocr. Or. 6 
Archidamus: see on § 4. The 
thought is again a common- 
place likely to be frequently re- 
peated : the apology, namely, of 
a quiet man for venturing on 
the unaccustomed role of a 
public prosecutor. 

petpiws] Androt. § 25 n. 

éuavrov telOw| Lat. mihi per- 


suasum habeo, here and Plat. 
Gorg. 453 B, has a sense (to be 
persuaded, i.e. to hold firmly 
an opinion) clearly distinguish- 
able from that of méreopua (to 
be persuaded to do something). 
For the latter cf. Thucyd. v. 40 
§ 2, rovs yap Bowrovs govro 
mwereioba. vrd Aaxedamoviwy 76 
te Ilavaxrov kabeXetr. 

éferafoua] ‘appear.’ Androt. 
§ 66 x. Below, § 173. 

Gro Tod mpayyaros} ‘foreign 
to the matter,’ ‘irrelevant’ K.: 
like dao oKorov, ‘wide of the 
mark.’ In this sense the correct 
accentuation is do, preserved 
here by the best MSS. The 
point is discussed in G. H. 
Schaefer’s Meletemata Critica, 
p. 51. 

éya yap, 3b dvipes}] ‘You must 
know, men of Athens, I came 
into collision with a vile, quar- 
relsome, abominable fellow’ K. 
A well-known use of ydp at the 
beginning of a narrative: ‘ the 
fact is.’—Oeots éx@pq, Androt, 
§ 59. 

’"Avdporiwva 


Aéyw] Some 


aay: LIBRA ES 


OF THE 


‘KATA TIMOKPATOT#.U NIV BRSIT 


Evernpovos nouxnOnv vm avtod o8 6 u 





P. 702.] 


] , + See ical 0 rn 54 > \ ] 
els yYpnpat éof a Kakas Erraber, eyo 8, €& 
> a aA > > ee > ¢ \ > v4 Cal 
éxelvos iv ée@ &u ndA\Oev oddv, ovy STL TOY 702 


Oacev 


, b) > o> A »Q? A 

ovtwy av" ameotepnunyv, aXX ovd av Env, ovd' 0 
\ “ / > Rd a a / e LO 

KoWWOV arraciv éoTi, aTadrNaynvat Tov Piov, paotov 


4 dy om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum >. 


critics have wished to introduce 
*Avdporiwvi: and G. H. Schaefer 
takes the dative for choice where- 
ever MSS. differ, comparing de 
Chers. p. 96 § 24, cal wap’ wv 
dv &xacro OUvwyTat, TOUTwWY THY 
Ty >Aciav éxovrav éyw, xp7- 
para N\auBdvovew, and a passage 
in the Prooemia, no. 50 p. 
1457. Here, however, there is 
no variety of reading: and in 
doubtful cases Schaefer’s prefer- 
ence would now hardly be sus- 
tained. All recent editors, with 
Dindorf at their head, agree in 
adopting Ionvvetxn for IloXv- 
ve(xec in Aesch, Theb. 658, ’Epi- 
Bovay for *EpBola in Soph. Aj. 
569; in the former case with, 
in the latter without, MS. au- 
thority: though Lobeck on the 
latter passage argues with his 
usual copious learning in favour 
of the dative. 

§ 7. Kai rocoitw Seworepal 
The same statement occurs in 
nearly the same words at the 
beginning of the Androtion, §§ 
1, 2. 
els xpnuar &c0’ a] ‘suffered, 
it is true (uév) some pecuniary 
damage: whereas I’ &c. K. 
again omits to give the force 
of éo0 d: cf. Androt. § 10 n. 

dmeorepnunr] arecrepnOnv MS. 
=: but this is undoubtedly a 
correction of the rarer plu- 
perfect. Cobet remarks, Nov. 
Lect. p. 524: ‘nulla nisi apud 
Graeculos utra sit verior .lectio 


potest esse controversia.’ 

éfmv] This form of the im- 
perf. for {wv is given by all 
MSS. in the present passage 
(the only one cited by Veitch 
S.Vv. faw), and as a variant in 
Eurip. Alcest. 295, 651. There 
is no doubt that it is incorrect, 
and formed by a false analogy 
from the 2nd and 3rd persons 
&fms, &im. This was seen by 
the author of the Etymologicon 
Magnum p. 413. 8, who ob- 
serves: mAdvns ovv ‘yevouévns 
éyéveTo mpwtov mpdowmrov e¢nv 
mpocbéce. Tov v amd Tov Tplrov 
mpoowmov; and while believing 
that Euripides had written é¢ny, 
adds dperev evar &wv. The 
only question is, does this error 
proceed from the writers them- 
selves or from later copyists? 
Cobet, in his full and interesting 
discussion of the point (Nov. 
Lect. pp. 524—5), declares em- 
phatically that the ‘antiqui’ 
were incapable of such a mis- 
take, and that only ‘ Graeculi’ 
and ‘ sequiores ’ could have per- 
petrated it. Modern languages 
abound with false analogies: 
that the finer linguistic instincts 
of the Greeks could never have 
been misled by them, it is easier 
to assume than to prove. 

araddayhvat Tod Biov] As a 
parricide he would have been 
held accursed in death, as in 
life. 





90 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. §$ 8, 9. 


Hv av mor’. aitiacapmevos yap me & Kal Evel av TIS 
oKvnoerev ed Ppovar, Tov éuavTod TaTépa ws aTréKTOVA, 
acceBelas ypadpny KatacKevdcas els ayova KaTEéETTH- 
cev. év d€ TOUTW TO TéuTTOV Lépos TOV WHdwY ov 
petadaBav adre ytArlas, eyo 8, @atrep Hv Sixacon, 
pariora mev Ova TOvs Oeovs, Eretta Oé Kal Sia Tovs b.- 
8 calovtas* buav éowOnv. Tov dn els TOLaDTA KaTAaOTN- 
cavTa pw adixws adiddrdaxtov éyOpov nyovunv. tdav 
§ ndvcnkota Kowh wacav Tiv wodw Kal tepl THY 
elompakw tav ciohopav Kal Tept THY Toinow TOV 
Toptelwv, Kal ypnwata ToAda THs Oeod Kal Tov 


> / \ lal U ” \ ’ ’ 
ET@VUL@Y Kal® THS TONEWS EXOVTA Kal OVK a7rool- 
© éuol Bekk. £ Sixacras Z Bekk. cum ZFYQ et yp r. 
& xal om. Bekk. 


belia. 


e0 @dpovdv] Expressed in 
rovs duxagovras vuwv] This 


|| Androt. by ef wy réxor mpocd- 


fLowos Gv roUTrw. Some of these 
variants in the parallel passages 
are amusing, and some inge- 
nious. 

doeBelas ypapi xatackevdcas] 
In || Androt. (where see note on 
karaok.) it is ov« ém’ éue, add’ 
éml Tov Oeidy pov. 

7d wéumrov pépos...apre xiAlas] 
By: the Athenian laws which 
provided this penalty for liti- 
giousness and frivolous accusa- 
tions, a distinction was main- 
tained between public and pri- 
vate causes. In the former, a 
uniform sum of 1000 drachmas 
was imposed as a fine: in the 
latter, when damages were 
sought to be recovered, the 
penalty was a sixth part of the 
claim (riunua, Lat. litis aesti- 
matio), or one obolus in a 
drachma, hence called érwBeNa. 
The rule as to the fifth part of 
the votes was the same for both 
cases, Dict. Antiq. 8s. v. Epo- 


must mean ‘those of you (the 
jurors he is now addressing) who 
were on the former jury’: dixa- 
fovras being an imperfect parti- 
ciple (Androt. § 25 n). In 
Androt. § 10 the present time 
only is referred to: and there it 
is rovs Ouxdfovras Umas. 

§ 8. rv elorpaiw trav eicdo- 
pwv|] His oppressive exactions 
in reference to the property-tax 
are related at large Androt, 
§§ 48—64. 

Thy wolyow Tav TouTelwr] 
Androt. § 69 ff. ‘The manu- 
facture of the sacred utensils’ 
includes of course the melting 
down of the crégava and re- 
casting them as diddau. 

Tns Oeod Kal Trav érwwipwr] 
These would both be included 
in the lepa xpyuara of the next 
§, while r7s 7dXews would corre- 
spond to the do.a. Hence there 
is no occasion to suspect «al 
before r7js mo\ews with Bekker 


p, 702.) KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 91 


> \ , 
ddévra, ANOov er’ avtov pet Evxtnpovos, rryovpevos 
dppottrovtT eiAndévar Katpov Tov BonOjoai 0 apa TH 
/ \ / ¢ \ 9 > / lal 
Toner Kal Tinwplav vmrép av éreTrovOew NaBeiv. Bov- 
/ ] A b] , a L / a / 
Aotunv & av eué Te Tuyelv wv Bovropat TovTOV TE 
0 n @ uu / > lal be / b) £9 
mabeiy wv akios éott. Tov 5é Tpayyatos oOvUKET 
’ n lo 
dvtos audichntnolwov, adXrAa TpeTov pév THS” Bov- 
ARs KaTeyvaxvias, elta TOU SHhpwou play nuépav OAV 
éml tovTows avTois dvadodcavtos, mpos Oé ToOVTOLS 


h ris om. Bekk. Bens. 


in his first edition, or (with 
Dobree) the whole phrase xa 
THs TwOdkews.—For érwvipwr, be- 
low §18 n. 
BonOjoa...ry woke] Androt. 
1 


Bovroluny & dv] Like the 
corresponding English ‘I could 
wish,’ is only a less direct and 
more modest phrase for Bovdo- 
pa. So in Plat. Protag. 333 B 
akiav auT@ Te é&elvas diadéyerOar 
Cmws Bov\era, Kal col drws dv 
ad od BovAy (more polite than 
dmws Bovrer). Had the sense 
been ‘I wish I had accomplished 
my object, and that the defend- 
ant had suffered,’ &c. we should 
have had éBovAdunv av. But 
though the result of the former 
trial is not directly stated, it is 
no less plainly hinted at: and 
had the charge of éralpyots been 
brought home, Androtion could 
not have been appointed am- 
bassador and the present case 
would never have arisen. An- 
drotion has been acquitted, and 
Diodorus is fulfilling his threat, 
kal vov cal rov dddAov dmravra 
dpiverOa xpdvov (Androt. § 3). 

§§ 9,10. When Androtion and 
his accomplices had exhausted 
every artifice to evade payment 
of what he owed the state, Timo- 


crates interposed on their behalf 
with a law which enables any 
one who pleases to plunder the 
treasury with impunity. Our 
only remedy is to impeach the 
law and endeavour to repeal it. 

§ 9. rod dé rpdyuaros] ‘The 
case being clear’ as to A.’s ap- 
propriation of public money. 
Schaefer justly denies that there 
is any undue abruptness here, 
as some have thought. 

Tis Boudns] The senate had 
decided by mpoBovdevua (like our 
grand juries) that there was a 
prima facie case against the 
defendants and that the trial 
should proceed. Most MSS., in- 
cluding the best, omit the ar- 
ticle before BovAjs and are fol- 
lowed by Bekker and Benseler. 
The latter gives the meaning as 
‘one of the two councils’: an 
instance of his following = first 
and trying to find a justification 
afterwards. MS. authority must 
here yield to the sense of Attic 
usage: no Athenian could have 
confused the functions of the 
Senate and the Areiopagus, any 
more than an Englishman could 
write ‘ the budget was introduced 
in one of the two Houses of Par- 
liament.’ 


Io 


92 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS 


[$§ 10, 11. 


/ > 
Sicacrnpiow Svoiv eis Eva Kab yirlovs ebndicpévor, 
> , \ ’ lal 7 > lal an \ \ , 
evovans O€ ovdemias ET atrootpopiys Tod pu) TA ypN- 
¢ n tal 
pat éxew vuas, Tywoxpatns ovtocl Tocot@ wepel- 
A 

Sev aravta Ta Tpaypata wWote TiOnoL TouvToV) Tov 
/ > @ rn an 
vouov, Ou’ ob TAY iepadv wev ypnuaTtav Tors Oeods, TOV 

¢ lal 
ociwy O€ THY TOW aTooTEpel, axuvpa Sé TA Yyvo- 

/ pAi¢ \ a a lal a 

abév? vireo THs BovAns Kal Tod Symov Kat Tod SiKa- 
/ , v \ \ \ , a 
oTnplov Kabiarnow, aderay Sé Ta Kowa Svaprratew TO 


/ , 
Bovropév@m tretoinker. 


Sixaornplow dSvoivy] Not ‘two 
courts’ or juries, but a single 
jury composed of two divisions 
of the Heliastic court. The 
whole number of 6000 Dicasts 
was divided into ten sections of 
500 each, so that 1000 remained 
over, in order, when necessary, 
to serve for the filling of vacan- 
cies in the sections. 

els &€va kal xAovs] The num- 
ber on a jury was always un- 
even, and if we find 200 or 2000 
dicasts mentioned, we are to 
assume that the round numbers 
only are given instead of 201 or 
2001. These figures may be 
taken as the extreme limits of 
an Athenian jury: the most 
usual number appears to have 
been 501, at least in the Heliaea, 
the most dignified of the courts: 
but Pollux tells us that actions 
for sums under 1000 drachmas 
were tried before 201, for larger 
sums before 401 judges. The 
higher figures mentioned in the 
text are supported by Harpocra- 
tion s. v. nAala: ouvjecay oi 
pev xtdeot Ex Svoty dixacrnpiow, ot 
dé xidvoe revrakdoro Ex TpL@y (an 
instance of the use of round 
numbers, omitting the odd fi- 
gure). All the known examples 
from ancient authors were col- 
lected in Meier and Schoemann’s 


¢€ \ \ / ¢ , 
virép 61) TOUTwY aTavToV 


Attischer Process, pp. 138—140: 
but fresh light has been thrown 
upon the subject by inscriptions, 
and Schoemann in his later 
work, the Antiquities, modified 
some of his former conclusions. 
Compare Schoemann, Antiq. 
p- 474 ff. and Perrot, Essai sur le 
Droit Public d@ Athénes, pp. 242 
—247.—éWngiopévwv with dixa- 
orTnpiov, an enallage not un- 
common with the dual number. 

Toc000’ umepetdev] ‘treated all 
the proceedings with such con- 
tempt.’ Some MSS. read rocod- 
Tov, which seems preferable: 
but this passage is not among 
those noticed by Cobet (cf. 
Androt. § 2 n.). 

GTOCTEPEL...... Kkabicornow] As 
other passages (cf. §§ 16, 189) 
imply that the prize-money had 
at last been disgorged by the 
ambassadors, it has been thought 
that we have here traces of a 
double recension of the Speech 
(Blass, m1. p. 244 ff.). We might, 
however, explain these presents, 
as well as ezolncev below, of 
the permanent effect of Timo- 
crates’ law, if suffered to remain 
unrepealed; ‘he deprives the 
gods...invalidates the decisions 
of the council...and has enabled 
any one that pleases to plunder 
the state with impunity.’ So K. 


793 


II 


P. 703.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS, 


93 


AVow evpicKowev TaVTnV ovcaVv moVNV, eb Yyparra- 
fevol TOV VOmov Kal EloayayovTeEs eis Uuds AdoaL 


duvaipeba. 


€£ apyis ovv év Bpaxéoe ta TpaylevTa 


/ \ ¢e na ivf lana U \ 
Oletps TOs Vas, Wa wadAov wabyTe Kal TapaKoXov- 
Onante Tols Tepl TOV VOMOV aUTOV adiKnMac~D. 
Wndicpa eirrev ev vuiv “Apistopan érxéc ban Enrn- 


§ 10. ypavduevor tov vdpor] 
The title of the speech, kata 
Tiwoxparous, shows that not 
merely the law was impeached 
but its author personally: on 
the other hand we have mpos 
Aenrivny, the speech against the 
law of Leptines, cf. § 33. 

eloayayovres els buas] ‘ bring it 
before you’ K. Rather ‘into 
this court.’ elodyeww, eloaywyi, 
eloaryuryimos are all technical law- 
terms: cf. § 14. 

dlecut] Cobet Var. Lect. p.307 
gives the following rules for the 
Attic forms from &pxoua: and its 
compounds. Fut. ef never 
édevoouat. Imperf. ga (after 
Menander jew) never npxdunr. 
Imper. i@¢ not épxov. Part. lav 
not épxéduevos. Such forms as 
é\jrvda and HdGov, the same 
’Arrixws and ‘E\Anukds, did not 
mislead the copyists. 

§§ 11—16. Fuller statement 
of the circumstances of the 
passing of ‘Timocrates’ law. 
On occasion of a general inquiry 
into State debts, information 
was laid that Archebius and 
Lysitheides, who had been trier- 
archs, had not yet accounted for 
the possession of nine talents and 
a half of prize money which in 
law belonged to the state. An- 
drotion, Glauketes and Melano- 
pus thereupon took the responsi- 
bility upon themselves ; they had 
been sailing as ambassadors on 
board the trireme which made 
the capture, and they owned to 


the possession of the sum claimed 
It was very reasonably proposed 
that the state should exact the 
money from the trierarchs, and 
that a Diadicasia should deter- 
mine the question of liability as 
between them and the ambassa- 
dors. It was at this point, when 
Androtion and his associates had 
exhausted every other means of 
delay, that Timocrates came to 
their aid with his law—the law 
which we now impeach. Its 
immediate effect was that the 
conspirators did not pay a single 
drachma at the time: but its 
permanent effects, if it is allowed 
to stand unrepealed, will be both 
disastrous and disgraceful, se- 
curing practical impunity for 
Srauds against the treasury, 

§ 11. év duty] §§$ 16, 25. 

"Apsropwv] Of the deme Aze- 
nia, eminent for his oratorical 
talents, his restless activity as 
a politician, and his longevity. 
According to A. Schaefer 1. 162 
he was born some years before 
the Peloponnesian war, and only 
retired from the Bema about 
Ol. 107, 1 (B.c. 352—1, a year 
after the date of this speech). 
His long life must have nearly 
coincided with that of Isocra- 
tes, born 436; but it was even 
longer, as we read that he com- 
pleted 100 years all but a month 
(Schol, on Aeschin. Timarch. 
§ 64 éreBiwoe pévrot o "Apioropay 
p érn mapa pyva). Demosth. 
calls him dewds Aéyew, Lept. 


I2 


94 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


I$ 12. 


\ > / 8SQ7/ x an e a x “a ¢ / 
TAS, eb OE TLS OLOE TLVA 7} TOV LEPOV 7) THY OTlwWY YpPN- 


patov éyovTa TL THS TOrEWS, NVUELY TPOS TOUTOUS. 
peta Tavr éunvucev Evxrnuov éyew “ApxéBiov Kat 
Avowbeidnv tpinpapyncavtas yxpnwata Navxpati- 
TUK, Tina Tadavta évvéa Kal TplaKxovTa pvdas. 
mpoonr0e TH Bovry, mpoBovrevp’ éypady. pera 
Tadta yevouevns éxxdnolas mpovyepotovncev 6 b7- 


pos. 


avactas Evketnuov édeyev GAXa Te TOAAG Kal 


SucEAAOe Mpds Vuds ws EaBev 7 TpLNPNS TO TAotoV 


p. 501 § 146, and alludes to him 
in many other passages (see 
Dindorf’s Index Historicus). For 
his stormy career cf, Aeschin. 
Ctes. § 194: he used to boast 
(éréAua ceuvivecOat) that he had 
been impeached zapavéuwrv 75 
times and always acquitted. 

¢ntyras] Dict. Antiq. s. Vv. 
Zetetae. This passage well 
brings out the character of these 
‘inquisitors’ or ‘ commissioners 
of inquiry’ as an occasional or 
extraordinary office, not a regu- 
lar magistracy. A period of 
chronic deficits was likely to 
lead to their appointment: cf. 
Androt. § 48 n. 

"ApxéBiov kal AvoHeldnv] The 
name Archebius of Lamptra 
occurs in Boeckh’s Naval In- 
scriptions as trierarch in B.c. 
373 and as still alive in 342: the 
latter is doubtless identical with 
the Lysitheides of Mid. p. 565 
§ 157 (as mAovo.wraros he would 
be likely to be a trierarch) and 
of Callipp. p. 1240 § 14. 

xphuara Navxpatirixa] ‘the 
proceeds of a cargo from Nau- 
cratis.’ Naucratis was on the 
westernmost (Canopic) mouth of 
the Nile, but its exact site is 
unknown. Having been opened 
to Greek trade by king Amasis, 
it long continued the only 


Egyptian port available for 
foreigners. Herod. 11. 179. 

mpooHr\Oe TH Bovry] ‘the mat- 
ter came before the senate,’ as 
Benseler: rather than ‘he com- 
municated with the council’ K. 
mpoBovreup’ éypddy, ‘an order of 
council was drawn up.’ 

mpovxetporévncev] ‘voted for 
further consideration’ R, W. or 
‘to go into the matter’ Ben- 
seler. This sense of the word 
is not noticed in L.and 8. On 
mpoBov\evua and mpoxeporovias 
see Dict. Antiq. s. v. Boulé. 

§ 12. &aBev H Tpinpns 7d 
m\otov] motoyv is, as usual, a 
merchant ship vats orpoyyt\n 
as distinguished from a vais, 
paxpa or ship of war. Mr 
Whiston in his Introduction 
observes: ‘The capture, so far 
as we can make out, seems to 
have been an act of piracy.’ It 
was at least a piece of sharp 
practice. Egypt was at this 
time in revolt from Persia, and 
Athens had just been induced 
by the instances of Artaxerxes 
III. to abstain from actively 
aiding his rebellious subjects. 
The ambassadors may have 
thought the objects of their 
mission to Mausolus likely to 
be forwarded by an act which 
would not be displeasing to his 


Pp. 703.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 95 


% MeXavwrrov ayouca kat VAavKérny cal’ Avdpotiova 
\ e / ¢ ” \ ¢e / 

mpeaBevtas os Mavowndor, ws EBecay THY ixeTnpiav 

> 

av iv Ta ypnpata avOpwro.', ws areyeipotovncal 


i @Opwrot libri et Edd. ante Bekkerum. 


overlord the king of Persia: and 
after the ship had been ‘con- 
demned’ as ‘lawful prize,’ they 
had the further satisfaction of 
keeping the proceeds in their 
own pockets. The opening words 
of the Second Argument, zrohépov 
tuyxdvorros "A@nvalors mpds Bact- 
déa, give an inexact view of the 
political situation. 

Meddvwrov xal Travxérnr] 
These men and their surround- 
ings are described below §§ 125, 
126 with abundance of sarcastic 
detail. 

mpeoBevras] The rule that 
mpéoBes is used as the plural of 
mpeoBeuvrys appears to have been 
an Attic refinement, to which 
even in the best age writers less 
careful of their style might fail 
to conform. We do not find 
mpeoBevral, for instance, in the 
purist Isocrates; and the present 
passage (not noticed in Reiske’s 
Index) is perhaps the only one 
in Demosthenes: but we find it 
in Andocides (de Pace, last §) 
and Deinarchus (c. Demosth. 
§§ 20, 82). The examples for- 
merly quoted from Thucydides 
(vi11. 77 and 86) are now brack- 
eted as glosses (Classen). 

ws Matcwrov] This is the 
prince whose famous Mauso- 
leum we are beginning to know 
better through Mr Newton’s 
explorations. On his coins the 
name is spelt MATS ZQAAOS. 
Demosth. speaks of him after 
his death as having been the 
prime mover in the Social War 
of 358—355 B.c.: de Rhod. Lib. 
p. 191 § 3 yridcavTo péev yap 


nds émiBovevew avrots Xioe 
kal Bufdvrioe Kal ‘Pddcor, Kab ded 
Tal’ta ouvéotncay ed Huds Tov 
TeNevTatov TovTovl To\EMov’ Payy- 
ceTa 5’ 6 ev mputaveicas Tatra 
kal meiaas Mavowdos. Compare 
Grote, ch. 86, (vm. 654). The 
date of the embassy is fixed at 
355, the last year of the war: 
Mausolus himself not being at 
open war with Athens, but act- 
ing a double part with a view 
to his own aggrandisement. 
éOecav Ti ixernpiay] ‘how the 
people to whom the cargo be- 
longed presented their petition ’ 
K. It is literally ‘placed the 
suppliant bough’ (épidorerrov 
k\ddorv, Aesch. Suppl. 22, ramos 
vitta comptos, Verg. Aen. vir. 
128) upon the altar (ixernpia 
Keita émi Tot Bwyod, Andoc. de 
Myst. § 112: the whole passage 
from § 110 is a curious illus- 
tration of the subject). In 
Aeschin. c. Timarch. § 104 we 
have ixernplay Oévros eis thy 
BovAy vrép Tod pic0d: id. de 


. Fals. Leg. § 15 ixernpiav Oévres 


oi olketo. éd€ovro vay (where 
Dind, and Benseler omit év 7g 
dyuw with the best MSS.): 
Demosth. de Cor. p. 262 § 107 
ory ixernplay @0nke Tpinpapxos 
ovdels ws ddtxovmevos. Below, 
§ 53. 

ws direxetporovnca’ vueis] diro- 
xeporovety is to ‘vote away’ 
from a man (1) an accusation, 
i.e. acquit him, ec. Mid. p. 583 
§ 214: (2) an office, i.e. depose 
or supersede him, c. Aristocr. 
p. 676 § 167, Deinarch. c. Phi- 
locl, § 15: and so to reject pro- 


96 KATA TIMOKPATOTS [8$13—15, 


duets pon iva eivar. Tote avéuvnoev vVuds, Tors 
vouous avéyva, Ka? ods TodTOV TOY TpoTOV mpaxOév- 
Tov THs TOEwWS YyiryveTaL TA YpHpaTa. eddKEL SixaLa 
13 Aéyew vuly aracw. avatndnoas ’Avdpotiwv kal 
Traveérns kat MedXadvaros* (kai tadra! 
dv adnOn réyw) eBowv, rryavaxtour, édodopsdvTo, 
amréA\vov Tovs Tpinpapxous, [exe wporoyouv™ |, Trap’ 
éautois Entetv n&liovy Ta yxpnuata. TavdT aKov- 


CKOTELTE 


704 


* [kal MeAdvwros] Bens. ' ravra Z Bekk. Bens, cum ZTOQr, 
m sine uncis Z Bekk. Bens, 


posed sureties as insufficient, 
below § 85: (3) as here, property, 
Lat. abjudicure, ‘condemned it 
in the prize court as enemy’s 
goods.’ The emphatic vpels 
seems to imply a popular vote, 
not a dicastery: the probable 
results to neutral goods may be 
easily imagined. 

Tore avéuvnoev vas] These 
words are certainly a little ab- 
rupt as they stand, but I do not 
think that Benseler improves 
matters by striking out the full 
stop and connecting them with 
ws drexeporovncare. A slight 
correction, following some traces 
in the MSS., is rére dvéuvynoev 
das Tods vopuous os avéyyw: the 
relative may easily have been 
lost by homoeoteleuton. A 
still neater one is simply to 
omit dvéyvw, as added by some 
one who did not know that 
dvaptuynoxw could be joined toa 
double accusative. This is Mad- 
vig’s correction, Advers. Crit. 1. 
460: he compares Xen. Anab. 
mt. 2 § 11 dvaprjow vuas kal 
rods Tov mpoydywy Kuwdbvous 
[Demosth.] c. Timoth. p. 1185 
§ 1 éreday buds dvaprjow Tov Te 
kapov x.T.d. I have little doubt 
that this conjecture is right: it 


was suggested to Madvig by his 
pupil Nutzhorn, a promising 
scholar cut off by an early death. 

The orator is said to read 
the laws when he bids the clerk 
read them: comp. Mid. p. 517 
§ 10, where Botouae dvayvivar 
is followed by the usual formula 
Aéye Tév véuov, and below § 48. 

wpax0évrwv] This rather ob- 
vious gen. abs. gave trouble to 
some of the earlier editors: 
‘things having been done in 
this way, the money belongs to 
the state.’ 

§ 13. dvarndncas] Androt. 
§ 10 n. 

oxotreite av dhnOn Aéyw] As 
he is appealing to their recol- 
lections of a past fact, we should 
expect ef ddnO7 dé-yo. 

amédvov] ‘exonerated.’ The 
words éxyew wodrcyour are 
bracketed by Dind. after Dobree, 
who thought they might have 
crept in from Libanius’ Argu- 
ment p. 695 init. However we 
decide this point, map’ éaurots 
must go with ¢nreiv: ‘desired 
that the inquisitors should look 
to them for the money,’ seek 
it in their possession: not of 
course=map’ éavrav, seek it 
from them. 


p.704] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 97 


, ¢ on 5) , > 9 t 5 ie a 
TAVTOV VMOV, éTELdn TOT EeTTavaaVO ovTOL BowvTes, 
¢ 2 Ud 
gdoxe yvoeunv Evaetypwv ws duvatov dtxacotarny, 
n \ 
buds pev elompattew Tovs Tpinpdpyxous, éxelvors S 
5 \ b] a > \ ” > t Pee Ss 
eivar Trept avTOv els TOUS EyovTas dvapopav’ édy 
a / 
dudicBnritat tt, Tovey Siadicaciav, tov 8 nTTy- 
an / 
14 Oévta todTov oheldew TH TOA. ypadhovtar TO 
/ . Pe sae > - a / \ 
whdispa’ eis vas eiondev’ iva ouvtéwa, Kara 
ny U ” 2 hea / 
Tovs vopous edokev eipjoOar Kai amrépuyer. 
> / ‘ 
TL TpooHKev ; TA ev YpypaT Exel THY TOALY, TOY O 
) a / " , > om A 5) \ 
atroaTepovvTa KoAdLewv* vosou & ovd dTLodv ovdevos 
5 U £5 / \ 6) / Oe yA Qe” 
nmov Tpomédes. pméeypt mev Or) TOVT@YV OvdEéY NOiKna 
peta tavta be wav 


évtavba 


¢€ \ / / 
v7o Tipoxpatovs tovTovi. 
> / >? e \ \ / \ U 
avedéEato éf éavTov Ta TpoEipnéva, Kal TavTa 
. “ \ 
noiknuévor havycea@ vre TovTov’ Tais yap éxeivwv 
ee 
réyvats Kal Tavoupylaus picOdcas avtTov Kal Tapa- 
\ > , 
cxXav vTNpéeTny ep avTov Hyaye TAdLKHWaTA, WS eyo 


Zdwxe -yvepunv... ducacorarnv] 
yrounv Sdova is rare for do- 
patverOar or Néyewv. Sixarorarnv 
is here objective, ‘perfectly fair 
and reasonable :’ in Boeot. de 
Nom. p. 1006 § 40 yvaun rH 
Oixavorary Sikacew duwpuoKxare it 
is subjective, ‘to the best of 
your knowledge and belief.’ 

dvagpopav] ‘recourse :” a rather 
different sense from that in de 
Cor. p. 301 § 219 dvadopav et ru 
y&voro ‘a resource, shift, if any- 
. thing went wrong :’ orin Aeschin. 
Fals. Leg. § 104 ray eis 70 aga- 
ves dvadopay ‘recourse to con- 
cealment.’ 

diadtxaclav] Dict. Antiq. s. v. 
The State merely required that 
payment should be made, leav- 
ing it to the parties to settle 
among themselves upon whom 
the loss should fall. We may 
here translate ‘try the question 
of ownership.’ 


Wed. 


§ 14. ypddovra] ‘They in- 
dict the decree; it came into 
court; to cut the matter short, 
it was considered to have been 
moved legally, and the verdict 
was in its favour.’ K.  eisép- 
xecOac as a law term is cor- 
relative to elodyew § 10. 

avedéiaro éf éavrdv] ‘Took 
everything which I have men- 
tioned upon himself;’ nearly 
=ép avrov Fyaye Tddukhuara 
below. 

vanpérnv] Max Miiller has 
connected this word with the 
root ar to plough, Lect. on 
Science of Lang. 1. p. 254, 
quoted by R. W. Curtius shows 
cause in favour of the tradi- 
tional derivation from er to 
row, the root of épéscew, rpi- 
Hpys, WevrnkovT-ep-os and of Eng. 
oar. ‘* The Pet. Dict. [Sanskrit, 
by Boéhtlingk and Roth] com- 
pares with vr-np-e-ry-s, Skt. ar- 


7 


15 cadas vpiv éridelEo. 


98 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 15—17. 


> \ a 
avayKn S€ TpOTov VTomVHcAL 


\ / ¢ Sal \ \ > e ’ \ 
TOUS Kpovous vas Kal Tov KaLpov ev @ TIOnoL TOV 
, a \ \ an 
vomov’ Kal yap UBpioTiK@s TpocKeyNevaKes™ vas 


davnoetat. 


s \ \ \ \ > e \ 
nv mev yap oKLpOpopLw@V pHY EY w TAS 


\ e/ > a \ \ a > / 
ypapas nTTHVTO éexeivos Tas KaTa TOD KuKTHmOVos, 


U \ lal 
puicPwcapevot S€ ToOUTOV Kal ovdé TrapecKevacpévot 


\ / lal c¢ A 
Ta Sikata roviv viv KaTa THY ayopay NoyoTrOLOVs 705 


i, ¢ € n i ov \ , re / 
KAVLECTAV WS anTrXa Mev €TOlpol Ta XPHNPaAT EXTLVELY, 


2 wpocexkexrevaxws Z Bekk. Bens. 


a-ti-s servant, help. This mean- 
ing suits well enough the wider 
sense of vmnpérns, but not the 
narrower ‘oarsman,’ which the 
word with its derivatives cer- 
tainly has. Hence ar-a-ti-s may 
have been derived directly from 
the fundamental notion of gomg, 
striving [he further compares 
dpa, root of Spdw], vrnpérys on 
Greek soil immediately from 
that of rowing.” Gr. Etym. p. 
344=1. 428 KE. T. 

§ 15. rods xpévovs...rdv Kat- 
pov] ‘the dates...the occasion:’ 
‘die Zeit und die Umstinde’ 
(circumstances) Benseler. R. 
W. refers to Aristocr. p. 666 
§ 141 éy riot Kapots Kal xp5vots, 
and c. Neaer. p. 1357 § 35, 
where xpovos is explained by 
the mention of the archon, KaL- 
pos by év @ éwrodemet’ vets. 

mpookexrevaxws|] The best 
MSS. here give mpocexxex\eva- 
xws, a preferable reading as the 
double compound was more 
likely to be altered. Dindorf 
here stands alone. 

oxtpopopiav] The last month 
of the Attic year, ending with 
the summer solstice (May— 
June). It seems probable that 
‘the screw’ was then put on 
in order that the year’s ac- 
counts might be made up. 


There is an important passage 
in Andoc. de Myst. § 73 7 mer 
éxriois qv emt rHs évdrns mpv- 
tavelas, el dé un, Surrdovov dpel- 
ew kal Ta KTHWATA aAvTOV Tempa- 
ca. The authority of Ando- 
cides does not stand high as to 
matters of fact, but on the point 
of law he is at least more trust- 
worthy than the document 
quoted below §§ 39, 40. It has 
not been explained, so far as 
I am aware, whether the ‘ninth 
Prytany’ was to be reckoned 
from the time the debt was 
adjudged, or meant the par- 
ticular time of year. Taken to- 
gether, these passages clearly 
point to the latter conclusion. 
The nine prytanies would cor- 
respond approximately to the 
first eleven months of the year: 
the tenth would include the 
month Scirophorion and the 
last few days of Thargelion: 
and it was then, I believe, that 
the State’s demands became 
peremptory. —éxetvo.] Androtion 
and the other ambassadors. 
Aoyorroio’s kablecay] ‘they sent 
persons down into the Agora 
to spread a report:’ a rare sense 
of doyorows, but it occurs 
Theophr. Char. 8 (6), and Aoyo- 
movely is common enough, e.g. 
Mid. p. 578 § 198 mepucy édoyo- 


P. 705.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 99 


16 dura Sé ov SuvycovTa. Hy dé Tadr’ évédpa peta 
Yrevacias Kal KaTaTKEvAc LOS UTép TOD AaOeiv Tovde 
Tov vowov TeOévTa. joapTupet O OTL TavO odTas éexeL 
ToUpyov avTé' Tov mev Yap YpHnuatav éxelvots Tots 
xpovois Spayynv ov KatéOnkav vyuiv, voupw 8 évi 
TrelaTous® Tos VTdpyovtas aKxpous érolnaav, Kal 
TovT® THY woTroTE év Vuiv TeOévTWY aicyicTm Kal 
SevvoTato. 

17.  BovrAopac 87) poxpa dveEeXOdv epi radv Keipévov 
vowov, Ka? os eiow ai Tovaide ypadal, rept avTod 
TOU vOmoU AEyelv OV yéypaupaL* yernoeaOe yap evpa- 
Oécrepot mpos Ta AoLTA TadTAa TpoaKovaarTes. eoTLY, 
@ avopes AOnvaiot, év Tots ovat vopots juiv Kupious 


© wdelovs Z Bekk. Bens. cum libris. 


tole. Aoyorods usually means 
(1) an historian, “Exaratos o 
Aoyorowds Herod. mu. 143; (2) 
a speech-writer, like Demos- 
thenes himself. 
— § 16. évédpa pera xdevaclas] 
‘an impudent conspiracy’ K., 
‘a trap, in which they tried to 
catch you,’ as Benseler explains 
it.—xatacxevacuos, Androt. § 
2n. 

éxelvois Tots xpovois] ‘in all 
that time [such is the force of 
the plural] they had not paid 
you a drachma:’ rather than 
‘did not pay,’ as K. It is ad- 
mitted that the money had now 
been paid (cf. § 189 n.). 

meistous} A correction of 
Dobree’s, silently adopted by 
Dindorf. The Zurich editors 
suggest wdyras as more in ac- 
cordance with the usage of 
Demosth. 

év tuiv] Below, § 211. 

§§ 17—19. I will first state 
briefly the rules which govern 
new legislation, any breach of 


‘which renders the proposer liable 


to impeachment (ypagn tapavo- 
wv). Timocrates has broken 
not one, but all of these rules: 
I must therefore take the charges 
one by one, and speak separate- 
ly of each. But first the laws 
embodying these rules shall be 
read: you will then see that he 
complied with none of the legal 
requirements. 

§ 17. yéypaypa] The mid- 
dle sense of the verb here is 
followed in the course of a few 
lines by examples of the passive 
(yeypaupévos) and active (ypa- 
wWayvTa). 

év Tois—kuplos] There is here 
a redundancy of expression, em- 
phasizing the inexcusableness 
of T.’s conduct : ‘ in the existing 
laws, in force among us, is 
clearly and accurately defined 
everything which is required 
to be done in the case of laws 
about to be proposed.’ So K., 
nearly. . 


(—2 


100 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 18—20, 


’ > ¢/ a 
Suwpiopéva axpiBas Kal cadeds Tavl boa Set rrovety 
a / 
18 mepl TOV peANOVT@V TEONTETOAL VOowwY. Kal TmpPa@TOV 
¢ / / . 2 
bev aTravT@Vv ypdvos éoTi yeypappmévos, év @ TpoTHKeL 
~ s @ 3 ON /Zf~? ¢€ a e / a , 
vowobeteiv’ eit ovdé TOO ws dv ExdoT@ SoKxn dSédaxe 
n ’ 
TOUTO TpaTTELW, GAAA TpocTaTTEL TPwToV pev €K- 
Ocivar mpdcbev Tov éTwVUpwV yparavta oKoTElY TO 
Bovropéve, peta tad émi maou Tov avToY vopov 
/ / \ / U \ > / 

Tibévar Kerever, pds ToUTOLs AVEW Tovs évayTious, 
v \ ? ON ” ¢ n / n 
Gra Tept ov ovdév iows vas KaTeTreiyes vo 

x , , pal a tal 

adv S€ Tis TovTwY ev TapaBH, TO Bovdo- 

\ 
ef pev ovy pn Taow Hv 


akovo at. 
Ul 
19 pévm Sidwat ypader Oar. 
’ 
évoxos Tovtows Tioxparns Kal mapa mavta TavT 
‘ U a x > a lal 
eioev VOXEL TOV VOMOY, EV AV AUTOD TLS éTTOLEtTO KaTN- 


§18. dSédwxe...rpoorarre:] It 
is easy to supply 6 vopobérns. 
The indirect turn of the phrase 
may be preserved by translating 
‘it is not permitted’...‘it is 
enjoined,’ 

éxOewa] Another ‘locus 
classicus’ on Athenian legisla- 
tion is Aeschin. Ctes. §§ 37—39, 
where we find the same pro- 
visions for exhibiting the new 
law in writing before the statues 
of the Eponymi (dvayeypagoras 
év caviow, cf. below § 23 ava- 
ypawas eis evKwua), and for 
repealing inconsistent laws. In 
Demosth. Lept. p. 485 § 94 a 
further guarantee for publicity 
is mentioned: éx@etva: mpdcbe 
Tov éruvipwy Kal TO ypaypare? 
mapadotva, tovrov 8 év tats 
éxxAnolas «= dvaryryvwokev, 
éxacros tucv modAdKis Kal Kara 
TXOAMY oKeYdpevos av H Kal dikaca 
kal cuudépovTa, Tara vomobery. 
The statues of the heroes, after 
whom the ten tribes werenamed, 
stood in the Cerameicus near the 
Tholos (Paus. 1. 5 § 1: Wolf, 


Proleg. Lept. p. 133). 

érl maou tov adtrov] ‘applying 
to,’ whether ‘for’ or ‘against.’ 
Cf. §§ 59, 135, 159. The few 
exceptions to this rule were 
fenced in by additional safe- 
guards. ‘ Privilegia,’ whether 
against an individual (‘bills of 
pains and penalties’) or in his 
favour, required to be passed 
by 6000 of the people in as- 
sembly, voting secretly. Of the 
former class, ostracism is a well- 
known example: of the latter 
may be instanced the natural- 
isation of foreigners (c. Neaer. 
p. 1375 § 89), and the restitu- 
tion of civic rights to the aripoz, 
below § 45 ff. Demosth. en- 
larges upon this topic below, 
§§ 59, 60. 

TP Bovronévy dldwor ypdpe- 
g0a] The full phrase is 7@ Bov- 
Aouévy, ols €Eeort, i.e. qualified 
by age (twenty) and not dis- 
qualified by Atimia. Below, § 
105. 

§ 19. rapa rdvra—rov vouor] 


‘if he had violated all these con- 


20 


P. 706.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 101 


yopnua, 6 Te Snore ToT nv’ viv 8 avayxn Ka? 
Exactov ywpls jepl Exdaotou dieddmevov eye. TPO- 
TOV ev OvY, STEP NOLKNGE TPOTOV, TOOT épa, Ws Tapa 
qavtas Tovs vopmous évomolérer, cira THY dd\AwV E&NS 
& Tt av Bovropmévors tiv axovewv 7. Kai pot AaBE 
TouToVval Tos vomous Kal avayvwbs’ davnceTas yap 
TovTwv ovdey TemoimnKes. TpocéxyeTe, @ avdpes 
Sixactal, Tov vodv avayiyvacKkopévats Tots vomots. 


EIIIXEIPOTONIA? NOMON. 
P Emi dé ris mperns mputavelas TH évdexaty év TO 


P EIII XEIPOTONIAN Bens. cum 2. 


ditions in introducing his law’ 
K. rightly, preserving the force 
of the article. 
dtehouevoy] ‘H.1. idem valet 
quod éceXovra’ Dind. In this 
sense of ‘distinguishing’ the 
active is more common, as in 
Aristocr. p. 637 § 54, 1. Aphob. 
p- 817 § 12 ywpls Exacrov dte- 
Aelv. We find, however, Plato 
employing dvapety and dcacpe?- 
oOac indiscriminately in the 
sense usual with him, of ‘ex- 
plaining,’ Protag. 314 B. 339 a. 
ws mapa wdvras| Madvig Ad- 
vers. Orit. 1. 460 suggests dy 
for ws: but the text yields a 
sufficiently good sense. That 
T.’s law is contrary to the 
existing laws is not the only 
objection to it; there are others 
grounded on its ill effects, and 
these are referred toin ray dAdwy, 
tourovoi] ‘Pointing to them 
in the hands of the officer’ R.W. 
§§ 20—23. Revision of the 
laws. These §§ profess to be 
the actual laws which the 
speaker has just called upon 
the clerk to read. But like the 
other documents inserted in 
various speeches of Demosthe- 


nes, they are now universally 
acknowledged not to be genuine. 
There are, however, degrees of 
spuriousness according as the 
documents have been compiled 
from ancient and authentic ma- 
terials by well-informed writers, 
or by late and ignorant gram- 
marians deriving, in some in- 
stances, all their information 
from the context. Dindorf fol- 
lows Franke and Westermann 
in regarding the present §§ as 
belonging to the better class, 
and in the main founded upon 
ancient authorities (compare §§ 
27, 33, 39—40): but it must 
be admitted that they are very 
clumsily put together, and con- 
tain unmeaning repetitions and 
irrelevancies. These will be 
pointed out in detail. The no- 
tion of Taylor, that the docu- 
ment contains extracts from the 
laws as they were actually read 
to the court, and that this cir- 
cumstance is sufficient to ac- 
count for their fragmentary 
character, is much too fayour- 
able to it. 

§ 20. ’Emi 5érijs rpwrns mpv- 
ravelas] This may have been 


700 


102 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


[S$ 20, 21. 


, \ LA e lel / a 
Sno, érrevdav evEntat o Kipv&, émuyerpotoviay Toei - 
an , a U 
TOV VOMWY, TP@TOV meV TEpL TOV BovAEUTLKOD, SevVTE- 
\ lal m n ral 
pov € THY KoWOY, Elta ot KeivTaL Tois evvéa apyou- 


Ss a wv > fal 
oW, elTa TMV AArNOV apyYaV. 


€ > > / a 
» © émvyetpotovia 


4 ¢ / tA a a 

€oTw 1 Tpotépa, OT@m Soxovow apKely ob vopor ot 
, ene , e \ A <i a 

Bovrevtixol, 9 8 vortépa, oT@ pn Soxodcw' eita TOV 


KOLV@V KATA TAaUTa. 


\ 3 > / ee 
Thv & €muxetpoToviay elvat 


4 xecporovia Bens. cum =, 


a mere inference (though pro- 
bably a correct one) from the 
orator’s words in § 26. The 
Kvpiat éxxAnola were held on the 
eleventh, twentieth, and thir- 
tieth days of each prytany: 
hence the 11th of Hecatombaeon 
would be the first assembly of 
the first prytany of the year. 
émixeiporoviay mow] ‘The 
question shall be put to the vote 
about the laws’ whether they 
are to be confirmed as they 
stand, or to be revised. The 
legislative formula, expressed 
in Latin by the third person 
imperative, in Greek varies be- 
tween the imperative (ded5x6u, 
cf. elcayévrwr, avivTwv § 22) 
and the infinitive (de56x0a, cf. 
moeiv, xpnuarifew § 21). Hence 
it is hardly necessary to supply 
with Reiske dei rods mpurdveis: 
but the latter part of his note 
gives the sense of émixetporovia 
more accurately than some later 
interpreters: ‘danto prytanes 
concioni facultatem leges ve- 
teres suffragio suo confirmandi.’ 
Those who voted for the con- 
firmation of the law as it stood 
were said émixerporovety, those 
who thought it needed revision, 
dmoxeiporoveiy: the division on 
this question is diaxeporovia, 
below § 25. So with regard to 
the émixeporovia Tay apxav or 


vote taken on the conduct of 
magistrates in the first assembly 
of each prytany: cf. Dict. An- 
tiq. 8. v. Cheirotonia. 

BovAeurixwr] ‘those which con- 
cern the senate,’ opp. to xowayr, 
of general application. A dis- 
tinction, as it seems to me, 
more likely to have been drawn 
by a grammarian than by bu- 
siness-like Athenian legislators. 
And in the words which follow 
elra of xeivra x.r.r. there is a 
tolerably evident confusion be- 
tween émixerporovia Tay vduwr 
and émriy. tév dpxdv. On the 
whole I suspect that the authen- 
ticity of the matter of this do- 
cument, apart from its defects 
of form, has been rated too 
highly by the writers just re- 
ferred to. 

9 8 émexetporovia] The right 
reading is certainly 7 5é xeupo-' 
tovia, ‘the first question put: 
to the vote.’ So Benseler after 
MS. =: ef. Westerm, 1. 16 (Ab- 
handlungen). The first ques- 
tion is, in effect, ‘Does any one 
wish to introduce a bill to amend 
any law?’ If there was no an- 
swer, the second question need 
not be put at all. 

Thy 8 émixetporoviav}) ‘A 
clause which seems mere sur- 
plusage, with no reference to 
the orator’s argument.’ R. W. 


2 


La 


P. 706.] 


a . r \ / 
TOV VOLOV KATA TOVS VOmOUS TOUS KEeLMEVOUS. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


103 


€ayv O€ 


TIVES TOV VO“wV TOV KELLevOV aTroxELpoTOVNnOdct, 
Tovs mpuravels, ep OV av n eTLYELpoTOVia yévNTat, 
Tovely Tept TOV aTroxYeLpoTOVnVEévTwWY TV TeXEUTALAV 
TOV TpLoV éKKAnTL@VY’ Tos Sé Tpoédpous, of av 
TUYWOL TpoEdpEevovTeEs™ ev TAUTH TH EKKAHGIG, YpNn-a- 


® wapedp. Bens. cum 2. 


It is impossible that such a 
platitude can ever have formed 
part of the law. 

§ 21. ép dvdy 7 érixetporovia] 
K.’s version, ‘in whose term of 
office the condemnation shall 
have taken place,’ follows an 
inferior reading dmoyecporovia, 
‘Vote’ is the rendering of the 
text: ‘in deren Amtszeit die 
Abstimmung fillt,’ Benseler. 

movetv] ‘shall appoint (§ 20 
n.) the last of three assemblies 
(of the current prytany) for the 
consideration of the laws de- 
nounced,’ 

mpoedpevovres] It is just pos- 
sible that the ‘ falsarius’ in his 
admiration of legal tautology 
may have written this: but 
mapedpevovres seems every way 
more probable: it is the reading 
of the best MSS. and, of the two, 
the more likely to have been al- 
tered by the copyists. The tra- 
ditional account of the Proedri 
and Epistates has been corrected 
by recent scholarship. ‘The 
statement of some later authors 
of slight authority that ten proe- 
dri at a time were chosen from. 
the Prytanes for seven days, and 
from among them the Epistates, 
finds no confirmation from more 
trustworthy sources’ (Schoe- 
mann, Antig. p. 377). But, at 
some period between 378 and 
369 B.c. the following arrange- 


ment was introduced: ‘the Epis- 
tates of the Prytanes chose by 
lot one proedrus out of each of 
the remaining Phylae or sec- 
tions of the Council, and there- 
fore nine Proedri in all, of 
whom one served as president 
in the full sittings of the Coun- 
cil, as well as in the Popular 
Assembly, and was likewise 
called Epistates’ (ibid. ef. p. 
382). The following points 
should be noted in correction 
of the common account: (1) 
There were not two classes of 
proedri, one of ten members, 
the other of nine: but one of 
nine only. (2) Two officers, 
not one, bore the name of Epis- 
tates: the Epistates of the Pry- 
tanes, and the Epistates of the 
nine Proedri. (3) The former 
was chosen by lot directly from 
the fifty Prytanes: not by a 
double process, as one of ten 
Proedri. It is easy to see that 
when the émiordrys rev mpoddpwv 
(Aeschin. Ctes. § 39) had be- 
come confused with the ém- 
ordrns Tav mpuTavewy or Epi- 
states properly so called, the 
result would be (a) the notion 
of 10 proedri as a subdivision 
of the 50 prytanes: (b) when 
it was discovered that the proe- 
dri must be distinct from the 
prytanes, as representing the 
other nine (non-presiding) tribes, 


22 


104. KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [§§ 22, 23. 


, 2 sh a \ \ e \ \ a 
Tien émavayces TPOTOV peTa TA lepa TeplL TOV 


vomoBeTav, Kal 6 Te KabedodvTal, Kai rept Tov* 
dpyvupiov, omobev tots vopobérais éotau' Tods oé 
\ 
vomobéras civat ék THY GMe@poKOT@Y TOV nALATTLKOV 
a \ 
dpkov. éav 8 of mpuTdves pn Todor KaTa Ta 
\ 

yeypaupéva THY exkAnolay 7) of Tpdedpot mr) KPNMaTi- 
cwot KaTa Ta yeypappéva*, ddeirey TOV meV TmpUTA- 
vewv Exactov yirlas Spaxpas iepas TH “AOnva, TO 
x paxpas tepas TH “AOnva, Tadv 

\ , 
5é mpoédpav Exactos dherrétw TeTTapaxovta Spa- 
\ ¢ \ a? lal \ 2 »” \ 
yeas lepas TH AOnva. Kai évderEis avTav éoTw TpoOs 
tovs Oecpobéras, Kabatep éav Tis a odelrwyv TO 
s Oeop S, p éav TIS apyy ? 


® rou om. Z Bekk. Bens. ewm ZFYQ. 
t xara Ta yeyp. om. Bekk. 


the further notion that there vised: the number seems to 


were two distinct sets of proedri. 
To return to the text: the nine 
proedri may well have been, as 
Benseler remarks, a sort of 
‘assessors’ (mdpedpos, mapedpev- 
ev) to the prytanes: while the 
phrase of dv riywot expresses 
the fact of their election by 
lot. 

xpnuatifev] In the usual 
sense of the word, ‘to bring 
forward a measure in the Kce- 
clesia,’ corresponding to referre 
in Latin: ef. Shilleto on F. L. 
p. 430 § 278=317. 

wept Tov vowoberwr] * concern- 
ing the law-revisers, in what 
manner they shall hold their 
session, and how their pay is 
to be provided’ K., ef. Dict. 
Antiq. s.v. Nomothetes. The 
passage throws light on the 
constitution both of the Nomo- 
thetae and the Heliastae. The 
former were not a permanent 
committee of the latter, but 
were chosen for the nonce, when 
the (third) Ecclesia had ruled 
that a given law was to be re- 


have varied according to the 
importance of the law under cri- 
ticism (below§ 27 n.). They were 
chosen from among those who 
‘had sworn the Heliastic oath’ 
(cf. below, §§ 58, 149—151): 
hence we learn that the oath 
was administered, not to each 
jury as it was impanelled, but 
once for all to the whole body 
of the Heliastae at the begin- 
ning of each year. 

§ 22. ddeirew ... dperrérw] 
‘shall forfeit,’ § 20 n. So é- 
deéis adtwy Eorw, ‘an informa- 
tion shall lie against them :’ rovs 
évierx0évras — dvidvTwr, ‘shall 
bring the parties informed a- 
gainst into court according to 
law, or they shall lose their 
promotion to the Areiopagus’ 
K. For the rule of admission 
to the Areiopagus compare the 
Argument to the Androtion, p. 
589, 6. 

édy tis dpxn dpeltkwv] This 
was the offence against which 
évdergis Was more especially di- 
rected. Comp. Dict. Antiq. s. v. 


707 


23 






P.707.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS|| UNI WoRRSI' 


Snpociw' of 5é Oecpobétrar Tovs evdery9 
yovtwv eis TO SiKacTHpiov Kata TOV VvopoV 
avuovtwv eis “Apetov tayov, ws Katadvovtes THY 
érravopbwcw TaV vowwv. mpd Sé THS éKKAnaolas 6 
Bovropevos "AOnvaiwv éxtibétw mpdcbev Tadv éravu- 
pov ypawyas Tods vomovs ods adv TOR, 67 ws av Tpds 
TO TAHOS Tav TeOévT@YV voLoVv WhdicnTtat 6 7- 
pos rept ToD Ypovov Tots vopobéTais. 6 Oé TiBels TOV 
Kawov vopov, avayparyas eis AevKwpa, éxTiOéTw 
mpocbev Tov érravipov donuépat, ws dv n* éxxkAnoia 
yévntar. aipeiobar dé Kal Tos cvvaTroAoynoopévous 


Y 40m. Bekk, Bens. cum libris. 


Endeixis: and for the attitude 
of the Athenians towards state 
debtors, Androt. § 48 n. 

katavovres] ‘making the a- 
mendment of the laws null and 
void’ by their obstructiveness. 

§ 23. éxridérw mpbcbev Trav 
érwvipwv] § 18 n. That the 
sentences in which this clause 
is repeated could not have form- 
ed parts of the same law, was 
seen by Taylor, and after him 
by Westermann, Benseler, and 
Whiston. The attempt of H. 
Schelling to distinguish them as 
applying (1) to proposals of new 
legislation by individual citizens, 
(2) to laws already referred by 
émxetporovia to the Nomothe- 
tae, passed by them, and now 
awaiting their final ratification 
by the assembly, has not found 
favour with his countrymen. 
As Benseler remarks, the ‘ white 
board’ must have been in use 
on both occasions. 

% éxx\noia] The article is 
added from a conjecture of Do- 
bree’s, and seems necessary to 
the sense. — Wndlonra] ‘may 
determine what time shall be 


allowed for the law-revisers’ K. 

Tovs suvaToNoynoouévous] The 
name cuv7yyopa (below § 26) or 
cvviixo (Lept. p. 501 § 146) was 
given to several classes of per- 
sons appointed to speak on be- 
half of the public, and holding 
what we might term a govern- 
ment brief. We find them here 
and Lept. Jl.c. appointed to 
argue in defence of the laws 
which it was proposed to re- 
peal: conducting the prosecu- 
tion in cases of Hisangelia, and 
then usually ten in number, 
and also called xarzyyopo (Dict. 
Antiq. s.v. Eisangelia). © For 
other purposes the number 
varied: thus we have four cur- 
dicot defending the law against 
the proposal of Leptines. They 
were not a permanent body, 
but were chosen for each occa- 
sion: and they are to be dis- 
tinguished from the ovvnyopa 
K\npwrol, of whom there were 
also ten, who aided the Logis- 
tae in auditing the public ac- 
counts (Schoemann, Assemblies, 
p. 108: Westermann, ap. Pauly 
8. V. curvy yopot). 


24 


25 


106 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 24—26. 
\ 67 a A oN >? a 0é , 
Tov Onmov TOLs VOLOLS, OF av év Tots VoMoBEeTALs AV@V- 
tat, wévte avdpas €€ “AOnvalwv dravrov, TH évde- 
KaTyn TOD éExaTouBaLavos unves. | 
Odrtou wavTes of vomot KetvTar TONY 5n xXpovor, 
s- wv 8 8 \ \ a ¢ An , 5 , 
@ AVOPES OLKATTAL, Kal Telpay avT@Y TOANAaKIS SEd- 
Kacw oTt cupdépovTes viv eiot, Kal ovdels TwTTOTE 
avteime un ov Kad@s Exew avTots. elKoTws' ovdéY 
\ re Joe / io > \ / 
yap @mov ovdé Biatov ovS oduyapytKov TpocTatTov- 
ow, dda ToUvavTiov TavTa diravOperras Kal Syuo- 
TuKa@S ppafovet TpaTTeW. Kal TpeTov pev eh Vuiv 
évroinaav SwaxeipoToviav, ToTEpov eiaorcTéos eat vo- 
fos Kavos 7 Soxovaww apKetv of Kelpwevot’ peTa TADTA 
> A , x > ? 5) A\ / 
5 av yxeipotovnante® eiabepew, ove evOvds riOévai 


* xeporovnre Zcum Zr. xeporovyr Bens. 


7TH évdexary Tod éxarouBat- 
dvos unvos] That the cvvyyopot 
who were to defend the old laws 
should be chosen at the very 
first assembly of the year, be- 
fore it was known what amend- 
ments would be proposed, and 
which .f them would pass the 
preliminary stage and reach the 
Nomothetae, is justly regarded 
as a very suspicious circum- 
stance by Westermann, Franke, 
and others. The more closely 
this document is examined, the 
less will it appear even to be 
compiled out of genuine ma- 
terials. 

§§ 24—27. These laws are of 
long standing and of proved ex- 
pediency: there is nothing ar- 
bitrary or oligarchical in their 
provisions: nothing but what is 
temperate and breathes the spirit 
of our popular institutions. They 
provide ample safeguards for the 
leisurely consideration of every 
proposed new law. But Timo- 
crates complied with none of 


these rules: he neither gave his 
law the required publicity, nor 
invited discussion, nor waited 
for any of the prescribed periods. 
He smuggled his law through on 
the very next day: the words of 
the decree appointing Nomothe- 
tae for the occasion are sufficient 
to prove that the whole affair 
was a conspiracy of Timocrates 
and his associates. 

§ 24. gpagovo. mparrev] 
Nearly = rpoordrrovow above: 
but the use of gpagew for ke- 
Aevew is extremely rare in 
prose. 

§ 25. é¢’ wyiv] The daye- 
porovia (§ 20 n.) really belonged 
to the people in Ecclesia assem- 
bled: Demosth. here assigns it 
to the jury he is addressing by 
a complimentary turn of phrase 
not unfrequent in the Orators, 
Comp. § 11, Yadicw’ cirev év 
piv ’Apicropar. 

xetporovnonre elapépew] Ben- 
seler is almost certainly right 
in avoiding the hiatus: on the 


P. 708.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS: 107 


mpocétatayv, adrAa THY TpitTny aTéderEav éxKAnCIa?r, 

kal ovd’ ev TavTy TiWévar SedWKacw, ad\rXA cKérac Gat 

Kal 6 Te Tovs vopobétas Kaieite. év 5é TH petakv 708 
Xpove@ TOUTM TpocéTakay Tots BovAropévois eiodhépery 
éxTilévat Tovs vopwous mpocbev Tov éravipor, iv 6 
Bovndopevos cKxérntat, Kav aovppopor vyiv KaTion Tt, 

26 dpacn Kai KaTa oXOANY aVTEiTN.. TOVTWY LévTOL TOT- 
ovT@v ovTwy ovdev TreToinke Timoxparns ovToct: 
ove yap €&€Onke Tov vouor, ovT Edwxev, et Tis éBov- 
eTO avayvovs avTevTreiv, ovT avéuewwev ovdéva THY 
TeTAypéevov Ypovev ev Tois Vopots, AANA THS éxKAy- 
alas, év 7) TOS Vomous emreyelpoTOVnaaTe, ovaNS Evde- 
Katy’ Tov ExaTo“Batadvos nvos, SwdexaTH TOV Vvomov 
elanveyKev, evOvs TH VaTEpaia, Kai TadT dvTwv Kpo- 
viov kal ova Tadt’ ahewévns THs Bovrijs, Svatpaka- 
pevos peta Tov vulv ériBovrevovtav KabiferOat vo- 
pobéras dia Wndicpatos émt TH THév IlavaOnvaiov 


Y évdexarns libri, Illud e coni, Hieron. Wolfii. 


from attendance’ because of the 
holiday. Cf. § 29 dmqvrwr iuav 


other hand, the aorist is more 
appropriate than the present in 


reference to a single vote. 

kad’ 6 Te Tovs vomobéras Kabe- 
e(re] ‘on what terms you will 
appoint the session of the law- 
revisers’ K. Correlative to the 
expression xa’ 6 re Kabedobvrat 
in § 21, which is most likely 
fabricated from the present pas- 
sage. 

§ 26. ray reraypuevwr xpdvwr] 
Explained by ri reXeuralay radv 
Tpiav éxxAnorov § 21, rhv rpiryv 
amédetay éxxAnolav § 25. The 
legal interval would be nearly 
three weeks (Hecatombaeon 11 
—30, see § 20). 

Kpoviwy] The festival of 
Kronos (Saturn) on the 12th of 
Hecatombaeon, Dict. Antiq. 
f. V. —agemérns, ‘discharged 


ayovTwy lepounviav. 
Tlavaénvaiwy] The question 
whether these were the Greater 
or Lesser Panathenaea is of 
some interest in connexion with 
the chronology of this speech. 
The Greater Panathenaea were 
held every four years (a wevre- 
Typls) in the third year of each 
Olympiad, and lasted twelve 
days, Hecatombaeon 17—28. 
In other years the Lesser Pana- 
thenaea were held at the same 
season: it is probable, though 
not certain, that they also 
lasted twelve days (Dict. Antiq. 
8. v.). Now the date of this 
speech is some time in the 
archonship of Eudemus (or 
Thudemus, according to Blass 


108 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


TS 27. 


27 mpopdcet. PBovrAopat S vpiv Td Whdiop’ a’ro ava- 


a \ an 73 9N47—P7Z / Ul 
yvevat TO vixnoar, ty 6(dnO”" Ott ravtTa ovvtaEdmevor 
2O\ 4% 
Kal ovdéy amd TavTopatou TovTwy érpatTrov. AaBe 
\ , ] > a wi. fm / , 
TO Whdiop avrois Kal* dvayiyvwoke ov. 


VHOISMA. 


PEt tis Tavésovidos mpdtns, évdexatn Tis 


* i676’ Z Bekk. Bens cum =. 


p. 244) Ol. 106, 4, B.c. 353— 
2. There were Greater Pana- 
thenaea in the archonship of 
Diotimus, at the beginning of 
Ol. 106, 3, July 354. If the 
Greater are intended, upwards 
of a year must have elapsed 
between the law of Timocrates 
and Diodorus’ prosecution of 
it. According to Benseler, the 
point was rightly decided in 
favour of the Lesser (i.e. July 
353) by Blume in his prole- 
gomena. I have not been able 
to consult Blume’s tract, an in- 
augural dissertation at Berlin, 
1823; but I presume his argu- 
ment is based upon the im- 
probability of so long a delay. 
Blass, who does not allude to 
the Panathenaea, gives by im- 
plication the same date when he 
remarks that ‘at the end of 
Ol. 106, 3 (=summer of 353) 
matters had gone so far that 
Androtion and his colleagues 
had only the alternatives of im- 
mediate payment or of being 
adjudged defaulters.’ Clinton 
discusses the question without 
arriving at a definite conclusion, 
F. H. 1. 334. 

§ 27. ovvratduev] opp. to 
amd tavrouarov, ‘everything by 
deliberate contrivance, and no- 
thing on the spur ofthe moment.’ 


® xal om. Bens. cum SFrv. 


AaBe 7d Wydiop’ avrois] (To 
the clerk) ‘ For the information 
of the jury, take the decree and 
read it:’ avrois is to be joined 
(as a dat. commodi) to rae, 
not to dvaylyvwoxe. A com- 
moner phrase in Demosth. is 
AaBé wow, ‘please take.’ Bense- 
ler follows = and some other 
MSS. in omitting «al, and justi- 
fies the abruptness of dvayi- : 
yvwoke od by other instances: he 
translates ‘Nimm ihnen das 
Decret her. Lies es.’ 

Ent rijs Ilavdcovldos awpirns] 
This psephisma is evidently a 
clumsy forgery. Several eccen- 
tricities of phrase or statement 
are noticed by Benseler: (1) émi 
rhs IL. rpwrns should be ém rjs 
II. pvAqs mpwrns mpvravevovons, 
implying that the Pandionid 
tribe had drawn by lot the first 
prytany this year: (2) cvvvopo- 
Oerety 5é kal rjv Bovdny is incon- 
sistent with dgeiuévns ris Bovdys 
in the preceding section: (3) it 
was not the Prytanes, but the 
Thesmothetae, who presided 
over the framing of new laws 
[as indeed the name suggests, 
decuds=vouos]: (4) the absence 
of the usual introductory for- 
mulas, examples of which are 
given in Schoemann, Antiq. 
p. 386. Another argument, in 


P. 708.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


109 


/ ] / S v4 x ‘ee A , 
mputaveias, Eixparns eimev, o1ws av ta tepa Ovn- » 
e \ / rn 
Tat Kal 7” Svoiknots ikavn yévntat Kal el Twos évdet 


mpos'ta Iavabnvata SioixnOy, tovs mpuTdavers Tovs 


ths Ilavésovides Kkabicat vopobétas aviptov, tovs é 


f = c/ \ / > a > , 
vomobéras eivar éva Kal xiNlovs €x THY OMwpoKOTaD, 
na \ \ \ ‘ 
auvvopobetety 5é Kat THY Bovrnv.| 


> kal ras 7 Bens. cum =r. 


which I am unable to follow 
Benseler, will be noticed fur- 
ther on. 

’Emcxparns| This is the read- 
ing of all modern Edd. since 
Taylor, supported by most of 
the MSS. and the scholiast Ul- 
pian. Dindorf rightly insists 
that copyists were likely enough 
to substitute the name of Timo- 
crates for the obscure Epicrates, 
while the latter name could not 
have found its way into the 
MSS. unless it were the genuine 
reading. Ulpian’s remark is: 
éypawev 6 ’Emexpdrns, pidos rod 
Timoxparous...el yap kal ra duo 
éroincev 6 Timoxparns, vromros 
dv éylvero. The expressions 
pera Tov vulv émiBovevdvTwr 
§ 26 and 6 ypddwy § 28 also 
point to another person than 
Timocrates as the mover of the 
decree. 

drws av] ‘In order that the 
sacrifices may be offered, that 
the ways and means may be 
sufficient? K. As R. W. has 
pointed out, the sense of drolxn- 
ots passes by an easy transition 
from ‘administration’ to ‘reve- 
nues,’ So the Finance Minister 
is 0 émt TH dvoxyoe, Androt. 
§ 35 n. 

éva xal x:Alous] Benseler finds 
additional proof of the spurious- 
ness of this document in the 
fact that the number of Nomo- 
thetae is mentioned: 1001 being 


the usual number, he argues, 
need not have been specified. 
It would be safer to say that the 
real number of the Nomothetae 
is unknown; and it is pretty 
certain that it was not uniform. 
The statement of Pollux, that 
there were 1000 of them, is un- 
trustworthy, and in all proba- 
bility based only upon the pre- 
sent passage (Wolf, Proleg. Lept. 
p. 135, Schoemann, Assemblies, 
p. 257). The only other text 
bearing upon the question is 
Andoc. de Myst. § 84, whence 
F. A. Wolf assumes the number 
500 as the normal one, and. 
thinks it was doubled on this 
occasion. But instead of 
BovdAy Kal of vomobéra: of revra- 
koo.ot. Blass now reads % BovdA} 
of mwevraxdc.io Kal of vouobérat, 
the context showing that the 
two councils require to be dis- 
tinguished, 7 Bovdy of mevraxd- 
git and % Bovdy 7H €& ’Apelou 
mayou. Schoemann in his latest 
work (Antiq. p. 388) admits that 
the number of the Nomothetae 
varied with the importance of 
the laws under consideration, 
though he accepts the decree 
now before us without remark 
as an example. If we bear in 
mind that the Nomothetae were 
not merely chosen from among 
the Heliasts, but sat like a jury 
for the trial of the new law, 
which had its prosecuting and 


28 


110 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [8§ 28, 29. 


"EvedupnOnr’® avaytyvwcKkopévov Tod >Wndicpa- 
a \ 
ToS WS TEYVLKAS 6 ypddwv avTo THY SiolKnoLW Kal TO 


A a a \ \ 
THS EOPTHS MpocTHnTamEevos KaTETrEbyOV, AVENMY TOV EK 
TOV VO“wV YpovoY, avTOs éyparvev avpiov vomoeTeir, 


© évOuunOnr’ Bekk. Bens. cum libris. 


defending counsel as in a regu- 
lar law-suit, it will seem pro- 
bable that the numbers varied 
within much the same limits as 
those of ordinary juries, from 
201 upwards (above, § 9 n.). 
Here, I have little doubt that 
the number was suggested to 
the compiler of the document by 
the passage in § 9 dickacrnplow 
Ovoty eis Eva kal xirlous éWndgu- 
oudvwr, 

§§ 28—31. Comments on the 
decree of Epicrates. The real 
object of the conspirators was 
disguised under a pretended zeal 
for the due splendour of the fes- 
tival. When a jury of Nomo- 
thetae had been obtained, not a 
word more was said about ‘ways 
and means’ and ‘ Panathenaea,’ 
but Timocrates proceeded quietly 
to pass his illegal decree. It was 
too bad, that the rules against 
over-hasty legislation should be 
suspended by his unconstitutional 
motion. It was even worse, it 
was nothing less than cruel, that 
advantage should have been 
taken of a public holiday to in- 
Jlict an injury, not upon a chance 
individual, but upon the whole 
state—by overthrowing its fun- 
damental laws. 

§ 28. ’EveOuynbnr’] This 
conjecture of Jerome Wolf’s for 
évOuu.nOnr’ has been adopted by 
all modern editors except Bekker 
and Benseler. The imperfect 
participle dvayiyywoKropuévov can 
only mean ‘while the decree was 
being read:’ and all sense of 


grammatical propriety is against 
joining this to an imperative. 
As Reiske tersely puts it ‘impe- 
rativus non quadrat.’ Mr Whis- 
ton points out, after Reiske, 
that by asserting that the judges 
had given attention to the docu- 
ment while reading, the orator 
adroitly pays them a compli- 
ment likely to conciliate their 
favour. K. however translates 
‘Observe in the reading of the 
decree,’ and justifies the impe- 
rative in a note, ‘notwithstand- 
ing that it is disapproved by so 
many commentators. It is a 
loose way of saying, ‘‘ Observe 
how artfully it appears from the 
decree’ &c. And similarly Ben- 
seler: ‘Entnehmt aus dem vor- 
gelesenen Decret.’ 

6 ypadwv] Clearly different 
from Tioxparovs ovroot. The 
reading ’Emixparys in the last 
section is thus confirmed. 

TH Stolknow...KaTeTEvyov |‘ un- 
der pretext of financial arrange- 
ments and the urgency of the 
festival.’ K. slightly corrected. 
To Karere?yov is not merely the 
‘wants’ of the festival as regards 
money (already sufficiently ex- 
pressed by d:olxynow), but the 
urgency in point of time, the 
plea of which was made an ex- 
cuse for hurried legislation: cf. 
§ 18 ovdév tows vuas xaremelye 
vov axodoat. 

aveXow Tov éx THY vouwY Xpovov] 
‘setting aside (rather than as 
K., ‘without adverting to’) the 
time prescribed by law;’ i.e. the 


49 


P. 709.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 111 


? \ / ¢ 
ov pa At’ ovy iy ws KaddOTA yévOLTO TL TOY TEpl THY 
€ / te 
éopTyv (ovdé yap Hv UrdXoLTTOV OVS adLoiKnTOV ov- 
/ ? b mee ‘ 
dév), AN iva pn TpoacOopévov pndevds avOpeoTrov 
bane J / al 
pnd avtetovtos TeOein Kal yévotTo KUpLos avTois be 
¢ nr ’ ‘ 
0 viv aywvifomevos vowos. Texuyptov dé KabcCopé- 
ov yap TOV vomobeTay Trept wev TOUTwY, THS SvoLKN- 
\ a / v U wv / 
sews kat Tov Ilava@nvaiwr, ovte yelpova ovTe Berti 
/ a7 9 > , 1) \ \ 6e e bd \ 
vowov ovdév elonveyKev ovdels, Trept dé @Y oUTE TO 
‘ pI f t/ / , / 
Wndiopa éxéXevev of TE vosot KwAVOVaL, TywoKxparns 
/ 
ovToal KaTa TOAANY Hovylav éevopobéTEL, KUPLWTEpOV 
bev vopiaas Tov éx TOD ndicpatos 7 TOV év Tots VO- 
> / , > ¢ An be \ > 
pots eipnuévov xpovov, ovd oruovy dé hoPnOels e 
¢ a e , 
ATAVTOV VUoV ayovT@Y lepounviav, Kal Vomou KEtpé- 
vou | es ts} / / an 5 \ tAX ‘Xr, 1 ad > 
pnt idia pyre Kown pndév adrnrovs adixetv év 
/ a / \ / vA aA \ 
TOUT® TH Xpove, unde YpnuaTifery 6 TL av py Tepl 


4 roy yeypaupévwy tovrwy Bekk. cum libris praeter =. 


at his ease’ R. W.: ‘in aller 
Ruhe’ Benseler. The expres- 


third assembly of the current 
prytany, §§ 21, 25, rov reraypeé- 


vov xpovov § 26. Comp. Androt. 
§ 20 avedodca n Bovdy Tdv vouov. 

iva un mpoacbouévov] Madvig 
Advers. Crit. 1. p. 461 objects 
that wu) thus placed would ne- 
cessarily negative redeln, which, 
as he observes, is contrary to 
the sense. He therefore pro- 
poses to strike out wy. Other 
scholars are content to take it 
as a repeated negative, uh mpo- 
ato Bouévou undévos. 

6 viv adywrifouevos] ‘which is 
now upon its trial: not, of 
course, to be translated as a 
passive. : 

§ 29. epi uév TovTwy] An- 
other instance where MS. = 
stands alone in expunging a 
manifest gloss: cf. Androt. § 59 
n 


kara moddnv hovxlayv] ‘quite 


sion is, I think, humorous, re- 
ferring to the coolness of the 
man and the secrecy with which 
his bill was smuggled through, 
rather than to the orderliness 
of the assembly in which it 
passed. 

xupiorepov}] ‘of more author- 
ity.—rdov éx Tod Wndicparos= 
avpiov: tov év Tots vdmors elpnué- 
vov, 19 days at least, cf. § 26. 

iepounviav] iepounvia is (1) the 
‘sacred month’ of the four great 
games during which, as in the 
treuga Dei of the medieval 
Church, hostilities were for- 
bidden: (2) any ‘holy day’ or 
high festival, on which ali pri- 
vate enmities and consequent 
molestation were required to 
cease. 

xpnuarttew] Here in the gen- 


<_— 


3° 


31 


112 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8$ 30—32. 


‘al e a a , x ’ ef \ Uj 3 a yf 
TNS EOPTHS 7, AUTOS OVX Eva TOV TUXOVTA, AAX OANV 
’ a] 
adicav havnceta THY TONEY. 
ElOoTa Mev TOUS VOMOUS, WY OAly@ TpOTEpOV TraVvTES 


/ n ’ \ 
Kaltot mwas ov Sewvov 


nKovaate, Kuplous ovTas, eidoTa 8 ovK é@vO Erepov 
voumov wAwhdicpa ovdev, ovd av evvopov %, vopmov 
Kuptotepov eivat, yparrat Kal Ocivat vopov vuiv Kata 
wndicpa, 0 Kal avTO Tapa Tos vopmovs Eelpnuévov 
Hoel; 7) WHS OV OXETALOV THY wey TOMY AUTHV ExdoTo 
nuav Sedoxévar adevav Tod p° TL trabeiv andées 7 
Sewov év TOUTW TO YXpoOv@ Tolncacay ‘lepounviar, 
autny dé py TeTUYNKEVaL TAUTHS THS dopadelas Tapa 
Tipoxpatous, dXN €v avTh Th tepoynvia Ta péytor 
nounolar; Ti yap av Tis pelfov ndlknoev idiwTnsS 
avnp i) KaTadv@v Tovs vowous avTis, dv dy olKelrat ; 


© un om. Z Bekk. Bens. 


eral sense of ‘transacting busi- 
ness:’ to be distinguished from 
the technical legal meaning of 
§ 22, which however is the more 
common in the Attic writers. 

§ 30. ypdwae Kal Oeivac] 
‘frame and propose a law in 
pursuance of a decree.’ K. 

§ 31. ddevav Tod uy Te wader] 
The usual idiom. Omitting u7 
because in = itis only added by 
a later hand is a very rash pro- 
ceeding. Demosth. would at 
least have written rod madety ti: 
and Dindorf shows his superior- 
ity of judgment in retaining the 
common reading. 

§§ 32—38. Timocrates has 
not only treated with contempt 
all the rules and safeguards 
which fence in new legislation, 
by passing his law with only one 
day’s notice, and on a holiday: 
he has also carried a law which 
contradicts an existing law, and 
has not taken the proper consti- 


tutional course of first repealing 
the latter (32). The established 
law isnext reviewed (33), praised 
for its democratic téndency (34) 
and care for tender consciences 
(85). The legislator had pro- 
vided for the utmost publicity 


in view of any change, thereby 


making the people guardians of 
their own laws. And it is no 
sufficient answer to this, to say 
that the bad law may be in- 
dicted: we want prevention, not 
cure, and the legislator provides 
for this by blocking up the first 
approaches to illegality, and 
making it difficult for conspira- 
tors to stir a step (36, 37). Ti- 
mocrates has done his best to 
expunge all these safeguards 
from the statute-book: his law 
is, so to speak, contrary not to 
one but to all the existing laws: 
it strikes at the very roots of the 
constitution (38). 


710 


32 


Pp. 710.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 113 


7 / OX e , 
“Ors pev Tolvuy ovdév Ov TpoaHKé TE Kal KEAEU- 
/ ? x / 
ovow of vopor TeTroinKer, Els TA Tpocipnuéva TIS 
7 , ? / \ an_> 2 al 
ocKoTay av yvoin. OTL & ov movoy KaTa TOUT ddLKEl, 
\ / \ a / 
et mapaBas Tov ypdvov Tov éx THY Vou Kal TO Bov- 
Nevoacbar kal cxéyacbat Tepl TovT@V vas TaVTeE- 
” > \ e / b) , > \ ‘ 
Ads avedov ovaons lepounvias évopobéret, aAXa Kal 
A 7 a a 4 
kat éxeivo, OTL Tacw évavTiov eicevivoxe Tois ovat 
es > a , 
vopmows, avtixa 61) par axpiBas wabnoecOe. ava- 
/ \ \ a \ / a 
yvols 5é por AaBoOv TovTovi mpaTov Tov Vopov, OS 
, - In a a7 > > 
Svappnonv otvK €d vouov ovdéva évavtiov eciadépern, 


éay 6é Tis eiopépyn, ypadecOar Kedever. avaryi- 
yvooke. 

§ 82. Kard& Totr’ ddixe?, ef] Supa. 
In the corresponding clause we avrixa 6) pddra] Androt. 
have xar’ éxeivo, 87s with the §65n. 
usual love of variety (Androt. évavriov] ‘The policy of the 


§ 36 n.). The use of e/=dre is 
almost confined to verbs which 
express some mental emotion 
(§ 197 n.: Jelf, Synt. § 804, 9), 
such as Oauudfew, dryarayv, Seid 
movetoOar &c. and the present is 
probably a solitary instance 
with dé:cetv. The most common 
construction of déixety is with a 
participle, as in déuKce? Dwxpdrns 
ovs ev % modus voulfer Deods ov 
voulfwv, Xen. Memor. init. We 
should also expect aédixe? rodro 
with the accus. cognati to ex- 
press ‘his offence consists in 
this:’? the addition of xara is 
pleonastic, and rare in prose. 
This ‘expletive’ use of cara, as 
well as of other prepositions, is 
noticed as a mannerism of So- 
phocles by Prof., Lewis -Camp- 
bell in his Introduction p. 27 
(Essay on Language of Soph. 
§ 19): his examples are Oed. 
Tyr. 1087 xara yrmuav t5pis and 
Trach, 102 & xpatioretwr Kar’ 


W. Dz 


Athenian lawgiver was not to 
allow two inconsistent laws to 
remain together in his code; 
and there was no such thing 
among the Athenians as repeal- 
ing a statute by implication.’ 
K. What to us seems so obvi- 
ous, the introduction into the 
new law of a clause ‘ So-and-so 
is hereby repealed,’ must have 
been less easy for the Greeks in 
the absence of a convenient 
mode of reference such as mo- 
dern legislation, even when so 
amorphous as the English, in- 
variably supplies, 

ypaperOar kedever] ypdderOar 
is of course the middle voice, 
‘to impeach or indict.’ ‘ Re- 
quires that it should be indict- 
ed’ is K.’s translation. The 
indictment, however, lay equally 
against the law itself and the 
proposer (édv res elogépy): cf. 
§ 10 n. ypaydpevor Tdv vouor. 


8 


114 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 33—35. 


NOMOS¥. . 
/ a / \ 
33 [Tév dé vopwv trav Kemévov pr ée&eivar Adcat 
/ 2% \ > / / > 3 lal lad 
pndéva, édv pn év vouobérats. tote 8 é€eivar Te 
/ ’ > 
Bovropévo ’AOnvaiwv dNvew, Erepov TiOévTe avO Orov 
x F tad \ / 
av din. Siaxyerpotoviay 8é troveiv Tods mpoédpous Tept 
/ “a Lal n 
TOUT@Y TOV VOMAV, TPOTOV pev Tepl TOU KELpevou, EL 
Soxel érrutndevos eivar TO SHuw TO "AOnvaiwv 7 od 
U/] € S$ b é 1G z | b ” > 
lal , ¢ b] 
évretTa Tept TOU TLMEuevov. OmrdoTEpov O av yetpoTo- 
évavTiov 
’ \ nw 
5é vopov pn e€elvar Tiévat TOY vowav THY KELMéevoV 
/ >\ / a 
pnoevi. éav S€ Tis AVCAaS TIA TOV VOmwV TOV KEl- 
/ ’ a Lal 
Kévav Etepov avTiOn pun emiTidSecov TO Sno TH 
"AB. / Sg 2 / a , \ \ 
nvaiwv n® évaytiov TOV KELLévOV Tw, TAS ypahas 


! G bé a , f 
VNHUTWOLV Ol VOJLLOVETAL, TOUTOV Kuplov €lvat. 


£ rdv xipiov Z Bens. cum =. 


§ 33.. NOMOS. There is no 
reason to think this document 
any more genuine than those 
previously considered: though 
it has been held (see § 20 n.) to 
be composed out of genuine 
materials. 

év vouobérats] ‘before a jury 
of Nomothetae.’ We have seen 
that there might be more than 
one such jury impanelled, §§ 21 
n.,27n. The rendering of the 
English and German transla- 
tors, ‘before the Nomothetae,’ 
is inexact. 

diaxerporoviav] §§ 20 n., 25 n. 

tovs mpoédpovs] The Proedri 
are here introduced instead of 
the Thesmothetae, as the Pry- 
tanes were in the psephism of 
§ 27, by aconfusion between the 
Ecclesia and the law-courts, 

évaytiov Tv Kepévwv Tw] The 
case here supposed is evidently 
that, after the repeal of a given 
law on the ground of repugnancy 
has been carried by the pro- 


8 7 om. Bens. cum pr. 


poser of the new law, other 
laws not contemplated by him 
are subsequently discovered to 
be inconsistent with his new 
legislation: a further ground 
for a ypapy mapaviuwv. We 
need not be surprised that the 
previous sanction of the Nomo- 
thetae did not exempt the pro- 
poser from indictment: there is 
no reason to doubt the state- 
ment that he might be impeach- 
ed on the vague charge that the 
law was ‘contrary to public po- 
licy’ (uy émirndeov) as well as 
on more definite grounds: but 
after the time limit of a year 
(rpofecuia) the law only, and 
not the proposer, was liable to 
prosecution. The _ sovereign 
people was unwilling to recog- 
nise any limit, to its power of 
taking all executive and legisla- 
tive authority into its own 
hands, and suspending consti- 
tutional checks: but it was well 
aware of its own fallibility, and 


34 


35 


P. 711.] 


5 b , an \ / a a es \ 
elvat KaT aUTOU KaTa TOV VomMOV Os KElTAal, EaY TLS fy 7II 


érruTndecov 07 vomov.| 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


115 


’Heovcare péev Tov vomov" Todd Sé KaXDS KeEE- 
a a \ 
Hévov vopwwv TH ToAEL OvdEevOS HTTOV HyodpaL Kal 


TovTov akiws émaivov yeypapOat. 


oxéetracbe yap ws 


\ / ¢ ‘ lal , r b) bial 

Sixaiws Kal opddpa virép Tov Snmov Keita. ovK ea 
n / > x \ \ 
Tois Umapyovot vomows evavTiov eiapéperv, eav py 


/ 
Avon TOY TpOTEpoY KEipmevov. 


v4 
Tivos &vexa; Tp@Tov 


pev Wy vpiv 6&9 Ta Sixava npiferPat per evoeBelas. 
ei yap elnoav Svo Tues évavTloe vomot, Kai Tues 


distrustful of the professional 
politicians whom yet it had to 
follow as its advisers. Hence 
the large and indefinite powers 
with which this indictment was 
armed: it was a Tiunrds ayor, 
and any punishment might be 
inflicted at the discretion of the 
Dicastery (Dict. Antig. s.v. Pa- 
ranomon Graphé). 

In the present passage the 
two cases of (a) inexpedient and 
@) contradictory laws are not 

istinguished as clearly as they 
must have been in the text of a 
genuine law. 

8s keira] Not=rédv vdmov tov 
keluevov, but the words are to be 
joined closely to éav tis uy ém- 
THodevov 07 vépuor, like our phrase 
‘according to the statutes in 
that case made and provided.’ 

§ 34. drép rod Syuov] A le- 
gal system in which difficulties 
of interpretation are likely to 
occur implies the existence of a 
body of skilled lawyers: the 
Athenian laws were intended 
to be administered by plain 
men, and their framers there- 
fore endeavoured (without suc- 
cess it would seem) to avoid all 
ambiguities. This arrangement 
is praised as ‘in the interest of 


the democracy:’ for similar 
compliments cf. duets of rodXol 
§ 37: ép’ vuiv érolncay diaxerpo- 
roviay § 25. 

mparov uev] ‘Quod ei respon- 
det ére:ra, latet in formula ér 
mpos ToUTw v.15.’ G. H. Schae- 
fer. Compare the note §1 on 
the opening words of the speech, 
TOU pev dyGvos K.T.A. 

per’ evoeBelas] ‘To give a 
just verdict with a safe consci- 
ence’ may not seem a difficult 
matter. But it is casuistically 
argued that if laws are repug- 
nant no possible verdict can be 
conscientious, for it must vio- 
late one or the other of these 
laws, and both are equally bind- 
ing. 

§ 35. elnoay] elev is of course 
much more common: ‘nam At- 
tici veteres non einuev etnre eln- 
cay dixerunt, sed elev etre elev,’ 
Dind, Praef. Poet. Scen. ed. 5, 
p. iii. We find however efycay 
as early as Thucyd. 1. 9 § 5 
(passed over without remark 
both by Shilleto and Classen): 
yvolncav Demosth. Apatur. p. 
897 § 15.—déco?, again, is a less 
Attic form: two inferior MSS. 
read aévoln. 


8—2 


36 


116 KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [§§ 36, 37. 


eee, $86 > / x he 
avTloikot Tap vptv aywvifowrTo % Tept Snpoclwr % 
a > \ 

mept idiwv tpayuatwv, a&iot & éxatepos viKay wn 

\ : ee ’ , y S > / 4 / 
Tov avTov Seckvvwrv vouov, oT audhotépois Eve Sytrov 
WnbicacOa’ mas yap; otte Oatéow wWndtfopévous 
” > 
evopKely’ Tapa yap Tov évavtiov, dvta 8 dpolws 
KUpLOV, ) yvOows cupBalve. TodTOT ovv UTrép Duar 
n a by4 
guratTTomevos TavTa Tpoeime Kai ett Tpds ToUT@O 
, / ¢ a a / a N 
Bovropevos dUAaKas Uuas TOY vOomoV KaTacThaaL 
wv > a e/ \ ” \ , > A 
oer yap éxeivo, 6tv Tas adAXas as yéypadhey avTav 
\ »” nr / \ 
gdurakas éott Toray SiaxpoicacBat. Tovs cvvn- 
/ \ a b] a 
yopous, oUs YeipoToveite, SivatT av Treical TUS cLwTraD. 
éxTOévat KedEVEL TOU TpoEdévar TrdvTas* Tay AY, EL 
wt \ ) A 
TUXOL, TOUS ev avTEeLTToVTas av, ei” mpoaicOowTo, 


» ef uy Bens. cum libris. 


decxviov] Androt. § 34 n. 

N yrOo. cupBalver] ‘the re- 
sult of the decision is contrary 
to’ (mapa)... 

§ 36. rodTé 7’ odv...dvaxpov- 
cac0a|] ‘Against such a mis- 
chief the legislator provided by 
this clause. But he had a fur- 
ther motive in it. He wished 
to make you guardians of the 
laws; for he knew that the other 
safeguards which he has pro- 
vided for them there are various 
ways of eluding.’ This is K.’s 
rendering: and it is a good ex- 
ample of the advantage often 
gained by breaking up a Greek 
(or Latin) period into short 
English sentences (§ 138 n.). 

Tovs auvyyébpous] Called rods 
suvatodoynoouévous above § 23, 
where see the note. The addi- 
tion of the words ots yxetporo- 
veire helps to prove that they 
were (as there stated) not a 
permanent body, but chosen 
for the nonce. 

dvvair’ Ov metoal Tis clwrar] 


The Greeks, and especially the 
Athenians, sought refuge in 
numbers from their habitual 
distrust of individuals: hence 
their monster juries whether of 
dicasts (§ 9 n.) or nomothetae 
(§ 27 n.). These cuviyopo or 
cvvéixot, a small body of advo- 
cates retained to defend the ex- 
isting law (Lept. p. 501 § 146), 
are supposed to be capable of 
selling their cause to the inno- 
vators.—éxetvar, § 18 n. 

Tov mpocidévac wdvras] The 
genitive expresses the ‘final 
cause’ (to the end that, in order 
that): comp. Thucyd. 1. 4 rod 
Tas mpocddous uaddov lévat air@ 
(accus. and inf.), id. vir. 14 
Tou wy e&dryyeATor yevér Oa (sim- 
ple infin.). Other examples in 
Jelf, Synt. § 492. 2, Madvig, 
Synt. 170 c. Rem. 

Trax’ dv, el tix] This pas- 
sage is not without. difficulty; 
but Benseler has, on the whole, 
successfully vindicated the read- 
ings of the MSS. against the 


Pp. 711.] 


b] a 4 
37 AdOot, of & ovdev TpocéyovTes avaryvoiev' av. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


117 
andra 


/ \ {7 of 4 “A > \ \ 
yparracOat vn Ai’ Exactov Eat, 0 Kayo vuvi Te- 

' ian ay Ak 2 L fee l 
moinka’ KavtTav0, av* atanrdaky Tis’ Tov eto TavTa, 


i gyvootev Bens. cum libris praeter FA. 
k «dv évradé’ Bekk. Bens. cum 2FYTOQvs. 
1 ris om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum =F. 


alterations approved by Bekker 
and Dindorf and even by the 
Zurich editors. It is at first 
sight easier to read ef mpoat- 
cOowro, omitting wh, and to 
connect the clause ei m poala Bow 
To with rods dvrecrévras dv. But 
Bh is in all the MSS.: and if we 
join ef uy mpoalabowro with da- 
Oot, it is easy to supply e/ mpoal- 
cOowro with rods avreurévras ay. 

The sense will then be: ‘It may 
possibly happen that persons 
who, with previous notice, would 
have opposed the law, without 
such notice may fail to detect 
its bearing (AdBox) : while others 
through inattention may be 
ignorant of the whole matter’ 

(reading with = and most MSS. 

avyvootev for the dvayvotev of the 
Editors). If dvayvotev be re- 
tained, the latter clause will 
mean that ‘the notice will be 
read only by those who care no- 
thing about it:’ a good enough 
meaning in itself, but the au- 
thority of the MSS. is, I think, 
decisive in favour of a-yvootev 
which, as rendered above, yields 
an equally good sense. 

§ 37. addd...v7 Ala] ‘ But it 
may be said:’ of an objection in- 
troduced only to be refuted: cf. 
Androt. § 69. 

dy dmadddén tis] ‘Yes; but 
if a man gets rid of the prose- 
cutor, the state is still cheated.’ 
K. The notion of ‘ridding one- 
self of’ a thing is more usually 
expressed by amad\drrecOac TI- 


vos: but amradd\drrev twa is 
found in a hardly distinguish- 
able sense, ‘get him to leave 
one alone,’ Lat. amovere, as adv. 
Phorm. p. 914 § 22 rov’s davel- 
cavras am7j\daéev: Isae. Dicaeog. 
§ 28 dradd\dooew Tods xpHoTas. 
Here, therefore, it is practically 
equivalent to meica: o.wrdy in 
the last section. So Harpocra- 
tion s.v. d@els xal dmadddéas: 
dmadNdéas, 6Tav melon Tov éyKa- 
obvra amoorhva Kal pnkére éy- 
kadelv. The word is, however, 
more frequently used of the 
creditor giving a ‘release and 
discharge’ than of the debtor 
satisfying his claims: see Mr 
Paley on pro Phorm. p. 952 § 25. 
—The best MSS. read xdv ép- 
Tavd’, and SF omit tis: whence 
Dindorf conjectures aradvdégs, 
comparing 1. Phil. p. 51 § 40, 
where he has restored raraéys 
from =, the other MSS. reading 
mwaracy Tis. Benseler follows the 
Zurich Editors in simply omit- 
ting ris, but expresses it in his 
very picturesque translation: 
‘wenn man hier den, der einem 
zu Leibe geht, sich vom Halse 
schaffen kann.’ If the author- 
ity of = is to decide this point, 
the ellipse of 7s, common 
enough in poetry, may be justi- 
fied by several examples in Pla- 
to: comp. Jelf, Synt. § 373 b.— 
For the sense of rov émurayta 
R. W. compares Aeschin. Ctes. 
§ 79 Anuocbévns & éwéorn Tov 
dd\\wy KaT7yyopos. 


lis 


‘ 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [§§ 38, 39. 


Nn wos TapakéxpovoTar. Tis ovV pwovn dvraK? Kal 
, ' 4A” Frost , A f ¢ an e as A 
dixaia kai BéBatos TOV vopwv ; vVpEls of TONXOL OTE 
yap TO yvdvat Kal Soxysdoat TO BéATLCTOV éEehéo Oar 
Suvait av Uuav ovdé eis™, OTE aTaddXak~as Kal S.a- 
hbcipas meicar Tov yelpw BécPar vouov avtl Tod 
Qn , SJ : 
Sia Tavta wavta ép éxaotny atavTa 


712 


38 xpeltTovos. 
\ Oy a ; , , \ p) Pal ' 
TV OOOV TOV AOLKNLATwY, KHAVaV Kal ovK éov Badi- 
\ > , c¢ an 
Sev Tovs émuBovrevovtas viv. 
U c n \ / > U 
KpaTns, ovT@ Karos Kal Sixaiws Kelueva, nopavi- 


Tavta Twavta Tipo- 


> ; ¢ 3 > \ , \ , > / 
cev, €Enrevpev, bcov Hv él TOUT, Kal VOpoV Eionvey- 
¢ BA n al 5 ’ 
Kev atTraciwv évavTiov ws mos elmely Tois ovow, ov 
\ > , > \ ~ ’ by 
Tapavayvovs, ov Avaas, ov Sov’s aipeciv, ovK adrO 
Toimoas ovdev TOV TPOTHKOVTOD. 
e \ > 4 A a / > 
39 Os pév otv &voyos TH ypady xabéornkev, évar- 
\ an > / 7 
Tlov EigEvNVOYXOS TOLS OTL VOMOLS, Dial TaVTAS Dwas 
> A .o > 9KR > a @ 
noOncbar’ iva & cidnte map’ olovs vopous olov obtos 


m ovdels Bens. cum >. 


iets of roddol] The jury are 
identified with the Athenian 
people in their assembly, as in 
§ 25. 

amadddéas kal dia@Oelpas] As 
G. H. Schaefer points out in his 
technical language, ‘corruption’ 
particularises the general notion 
of ‘getting out of the way.’ I 
cannot think, with R. W., that 
amad\déas Conveys any notion 
of intimidating as distinguished 
from corrupting: and I own to 
a faint suspicion that the words 
kal diapGelpas may be a gloss, 

These last two sections are an 
amusing bit of clap-trap, and 
exhibit Demosthenes playing 
upon the Athenian dread of 
collusion and betrayal of their 
interests, ‘Four or five cuvv7- 
yyopo. may be ‘‘ got at” and in- 
duced to report in favour of a 


bad law; a single prosecutor 
may be ‘‘squared;” but no one 
could ever hope to “‘get at” or 
‘*square” you, the great heart 
of the nation,’ &c., &c. 

§ 38. elonveyxev dracw] The 
word dzaicvov, found only in 
inferior MSS. and old editions, 
but retained by Bekker within 
brackets, is clearly an accidental 
repetition of dracw, as G. H. 
Schaefer was the first to ob- 
serve. 

mapavayvovs| Correlative to 
the use of rapaypadew Androt. 
§ 34, where see note. 

§§$ 39—41. Proof that the law 
of Timocrates is contrary to ex- 
isting laws. This proof is work- 
ed out in detail in many suc- 
ceeding sections, down to § 67. 

§ 39. zap’ olovs vduous] rapa 
is ‘ contrary to,’ as in § 35: not 


P. 712.] 


etojveyKey, anaynereret per ov vpt 
vopov, celta Tods ddXous, ols OUTOS évaVT 


avaylyvecke. 


KATA TIMOKPATO 






OF THRE 


OF 





Se 7 





NOMO%. 


PEt ris Uavdiovidos tpaétns”, Swdexatn THs 
mputavelas, Tiwoxparns ite, Kal el TUL TOV Oetdov- 
Tov TO Snuocig mpooteTivntat KATA VOmov ) KATA 
Whndicpa Seopod TO AoLTov TpocTinOH, eivas 


 apwrns om. Bens. cum =F. 


‘in comparison with,’ as in 
mapavayvovs just before. K. 
neatly renders ‘what sort of 
a law he has introduced, and 
what sort of laws he has vio- 
lated:’ and so Benseler, ‘ was 
fiir ein Gesetz und in Wider- 
spruch mit welchen Gesetzen.’ 

"Ent ris Ilavivovidos mpaérns] 
The incorrectness of this phrase 
was pointed out on § 27. The 
document is admitted on all 
hands to be spurious, altogether 
composed, according to Wes- 
termann and Dindorf, from the 
speech itself; and it seems 
hardly worth while to improve 
its Greek by omitting mrpdrns, 
as Benseler does after > and 
one or two other MSS. 

dwiexdry Tis mpuravelas] The 
compiler found this date in the 
genuine words of Demosth. him- 
self, § 26. 

el... - Tpooreriunrat Sis 7. .. 1 poo~ 
74407] A correction in one 
MS. _tpooriunbeln indicates a 
consciousness on the part of 
the transcriber that the sub- 
junctive after ef was unusual. 
But G. H. Schaefer, while no- 
ticing this construction: as co- 
Aorkoparvys, points out that the 
indicative and subjunctive are 


often thus joined in legal for- 
mulas: and the subjunctive is 
clearly right as a note of future 
time. The phrase recurs §§ 72, 
79, 93, cf. § 207 n. To express 
‘if any person has been or shall 
hereafter be condemned,’ Attic 
law did not think it necessary 
to repeat éay after ef: and 
there are well-known instances 
in the older writers, such as 
Thucydides and Sophocles, of 
ei with the subjunctive. See 
Jelf, Synt. § 854. 1. Obs. 1. 
Madvig Synt. § 125, Rem. 2. 
Campbell’s Sophocles, Essay § 
27 p. 42, Madvig says ‘in the 
Attic poets (except in the choral 
odes) or in prose (except in 
the archaic phraseology of law) 
there are no examples of this.’ 

That legal language tolerated 
archaisms appears from the pre- 
sent passage and below § 42 
(dpxew for dpxecAa:): but in his 
otherassertions Madvig seems to 
overlook Soph. Oed. Col. 1443 ef 
gov arepnO&, where no one pro- 
poses to read jv, and Thucyd. 
vi. 21 § 1 ef Evorwow (‘the 
only, but not doubtful instance 
in Thucyd.’ Classen).—F or rpoo- 
Tiuay as always implying an ‘ad- 
ditional’ penalty, above § 2 n. 


ZRCESE | BRAS 
eer 


40 


120 KATA TIMOKPATOTS: — [8§ 40, 41. 


> a x + ¢ \ b] ‘ 3 \ a fal 
AUT@ 7) ANA UTrép Exelvou eyyUNTasS KaTaTTHOAaL TOD 
> , oo 2a, Oe eo , 5 \ Be 
oprAnuaTos’, ovs av Oo Shpmos YELtpoTOVyTy, H nv exTé- 
, ae: / wa Ce \ \ t > 
ge TO apyvplov 0 adde. Tods Sé mpoedpous émuxel- 
a / 7 
potovely éravayKes, OTav Tis Kabioctavat PBovrnTAau. 
r \ / \ > \ 7\ > a an 
T® 5€ KaTacTHOAaVTL TOS éyyuNTas, Edy aTrooWe TH 
, Wee Uj Pt 2 Oy / \ > \ 
Tore TO apyvpiov ep wo KatécTynGE ToOvs éyyuNTas, 
apeicPar tTav Seopav". édv dé pn KataBadryn TO 
\ A 
apyvpwov 7 avTos 1) of éyyuntal éml tis évarns mpv- 
\ ‘ > / / an \ 2 
tavelas, Tov pev e&eyyunbévta Sedéc0at, TOV Sé eyyun- 
] / > 
Tov Snuociav eivat tv ovclav. Tepl dé THY dvov- 
al / 
Mévov TA TEAN Kal TOV éyyvopévov Kal éxrEyOvTOY, 


© dpeirnuaros Z cum =r. P ois Bens. cum Fv. 
4 roy deoudy Bens. cum TOQr et pr. X. 


éyyunras xatacrqjou)] The The construction of this dative 


usual phrase for ‘to put in 
bail’ from Herodotus (1. 196) 
downward. See below § 55. 
égAjuaros| None but the Zu- 
rich Editors have followed = 
in reading ége.Ajparos : the tech- 
nical term 6¢Anua, ‘judgment 
debt,’ 7d éx xaradixns, is much 
more suited to a legal docu- 
ment, and so w¢dev following. 
See on Androt. § 34, below § 50. 
os dv o Syuos xetporovncy] 
The sureties were of course not 
to be ‘elected’ but to be ‘ap- 
proved’ by the people. Their 
names would be _ submitted 
(doubtless one by one) to a 
xetporovia for approval. 
émixetpoToveiy érdvayKes] ‘the 
Proedri shall be bound to put 
the question to the vote.’ In 
the use of émcy. for the regular 
term émipnpifew Benseler finds 
a note of spuriousness. The 
same suspicion attaches to ém- 
xetporoviay diddvar § 50: but in 
§ 84 érixerporoveiy occurs in the 
genuine words of Demosth. 
§ 40. re 6é Karacricavti] 


is the same as that of aird 7 
Gd above: i.e. we must supply 
not merely etre from the open- 
ing words of the decree, but 
elvac (in the sense of é£eivac). 
G. H. Schaefer, who thought 
this too harsh, approves either 
of Lambinus’ conjecture rdv 6é 
karaotiocavra, or of the reading 
of some MSS. rdv decudy. If 
the words occurred in the ‘law’ 
only, we might suspect their 
genuineness: but they recur 
without alteration in the text 
of Demosthenes, below § 86. 

eri Tis €vdrys mpvravelas] The 
explanation of this phrase al- 
ready given (§15 n.) is confirmed 
by the present passage. In the 
last or tenth prytany of the 
year all grace was at an end, 
and the State proceeded to levy 
execution. 

mwept 6€ Tav wvoupévwr] The 
statement here is in accordance 
with the words of Demosth. him- 
self in the next section. To have 
touched the stringent enact- 
ments whereby punctual pay- 


713 


41 


P. 713.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 121 


Kal Tov TA picOdowpa picBovpévar Kal THY eyyuw- 
\ , 
pévov", Tas Tpakeus Eivat TH TOAEL KATA TOUS VOMOUS 
\ > \ a U / 
Tovs Keyuévous. é€dv & éml THs évatns mpuTavelas 
wv Manel, 4 / > PH, B® fal » a: x U 
oprAN, TOD VaTépou EviauToD ert THS evaTns 7 SexaTns 
mputavelas éxTivewy. | 
? t \ na / / Pe b] a 
Axnkoate péev Tov vomov, uynwovevete 8 €& avdTov 
\ a 
fol TP@ToOV péev TO Kai el TLL TOY OhetdovTwY Sea pwov 
/ x \ \ lal ” 9: ¢ 
TpooreTintat ) TO AoLTOv TpocTinOH, eel” OTe 
\ fal a a / 
TANY Tepl TOV TEeM@VEY Kal Tepl TOV pLcOovpEVOr, 


T raw éyyuwuévev om. Bens. cum [TOkrs. 


ment of the ordinary revenues 
was secured, would have alarm- 
ed the people: and so the law 
of Timocrates, which was vir- 
tually (though not avowedly) a 
privilegium for the benefit of 
Androtion and his friends, takes 
care specially to except those 
revenues from its operation. 
Three classes of persons are 
here mentioned in connexion 
with the regular taxes: the re- 
Awvar; the éxdoye?s, collectors 
not merely of unfarmed re- 
venues such as the tribute (¢6- 
pos) of the allies, but of the 
farmed taxes under the redG- 
vat; and the lessees of the leas- 
able revenues, i.e. public lands 
and especially mines. Each of 
these classes of persons was 
required to find sureties: and 
Dobree certainly improves the 
passage by striking out éyyuw- 
pévev kal before éxreydrTwr, and 
referring kal tov éyyvwpudevwr 
once for all to the three classes : 
comp. below § 59. On the Athe- 
nian system of raising taxes in 
general, see Boeckh P. FE. book 
11. ch. 8: on the éxdoye?s, note 
on Androt. § 48. 

Tas mpdées eva] For mpaéis 
=elompaiis, Androt. §46 n. The 


plural occurs only here: it is 
natural enough in an enume- 
ration of different branches of 
revenue and the processes by 
which they were to be recovered. 

eav 8 érl ris évdrns] This is 
altogether incredible, as was 
seen by Dobree who accepted 
the rest of the law as genuine. 
The compiler seems to have 
thought it hard that those a- 
gainst whom judgment wasgiven 
at the end of the financial year 
should not have the same grace 
as other people. But so long a 
delay is ‘not to be thought of’ 
(Benseler): and the expression 
évirns 7 Sexdrns is too vague for 
the language of a law. See also 
below § 93 n. 

§ 41. pvnuovedere & €& adbrod 
po] ‘ Pray remark these parts 
of it—first, the words ‘‘if any”’ 
&¢e.’ K. Two objections to the 
law of Timocrates are here 
singled out to be enlarged upon 
in succeeding sections; (1) its 
retrospective action; (2) its par- 
tiality towards particular classes 
of state debtors. 

mpooriunO7] § 39 n. The sub- 
junctive is here without varia- 
tion in the MSS. 


42 


122 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


[§ 42. 


\ a a > fal a 6 x / a , 
Kal Oool TAVTA eyyuavTaL, yYpHoOaL KENEVEL TO VOU. 
7 7 a bf 
OXos pev yap*® éoti aracw évaytios Tos ovat, 

' Se ie r be da \ ' $5 hcg 
padtora O€é TovT@* yrdoedOe Sé Tovs VOopsous aKovov- 

/ 
TES GUTOUS. Déye’. 


NOMOS. 
[AvoxAjs eire tods vouous Tovs mpd Evx«reldou 


” ? 
teBévtas év Snuoxpatia, Kal bco1 ém’ Evxreldou 
éreOncav Kai ciciv avayeypampévor, Kuplovs eivas. 

® pev yap om. Z Bens. cum pr. =. 


t ravra Bekk. cum libris praeter =. 
Y yvdcecbe 5S’ dxovovres. Aéye Tovs vomous abrots, \éye Bekk. 


§§ 42—44. First objection. 
The existing law is recited, 
which provides that new laws 
shall come into force from the 
day on which they are passed, 
unless a date is expressly men- 
tioned for their operation to 
commence. In the latter case, 
the beginning of the next year 
is commonly prescribed. Retro- 
spective action is unheard of. 
Timocrates should have repealed 
this law before proposing his 
own; as it is, he has thrown 
everything into confusion. 

§ 42. mpd Evxdeldov] In the 
archonship of Eucleides, B.c¢. 
403, the first year of the re- 
stored democracy, a revision of 
the laws was decreed on the 
motion of Tisamenus, whose 
psephisma is quoted at length 
in Andoc. de Myst. §§ 83, 84. 
A small body of special Nomo- 
thetae appointed by the Senate 
and called also dvaypadeis (per- 
haps to distinguish them from 
the ordinary Nomothetae, Jebb, 
Att. Or. 1. 224 n.) were directed 
to report within one month to 
the Senate and the larger body 
of the Nomothetae. (The read- 
ing of this passage of Ando- 


cides, bearing upon the number 
of the Nomothetae, has already 
been discussed § 27 n.). The 
work of the revising commission 
included the restoration of the 
old laws, among which those 
of Draco (@ecuol) and Solon (vé- 
or) are specially mentioned, as 
well as the new legislation of 
the year (here called ém Kv- 
k\eldov). The delays of some of 
these dvaypadeis in failing to 
report form the subject of the 
curious speech of Lysias against 
Nicomachus, who was the prin- 
cipal delinquent. We need not 
be surprised at any inconsis- 
tencies between the real decree 
of Tisamenus and the pretended 
law of Diocles, nor attempt to 
reconcile them. 

év Snuoxparia) Because the 
acts of the Thirty, as well as 
those of the Four Hundred in 
411, were expressly excluded : 
cf. below § 56. There had been 
a similar commission in 410, of 
which Nicomachus had also 
been a member, in order to 
purify the laws from the oli- 
garchic taint. 

dvayeypaupévor] Andoe. l.c. 
mentionstwo such processes: the 


P. 713.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


123 


tovs dé wet Evxreldnv teOévtas Kal TO Nowtrov TiOe- 
pévous Kuplous eivat amd THS Huépas Hs ExacTtos 
éréOn, TANV El TW TPOoTyéeypaTrTaL ypovos bvTLWa Sét 
dpyew. émiyparas € toils pev viv Keipévois TOV 
ypaypatéa tHS Bovis TpiaKovta tuepav’ TO dé 


temporary, dvaypdgorres év oa- 
viowv éxridévTwy mpods Tovs ETw- 
vious oKotety T@ Bovdouév@: 
the permanent, cir’ dvaypdyac 
év TH GTO TovTOUs TWY vouwr ot 
dv doxac0Gcow (§ 82). The 
latter is of course here intended. 
wriv el tw mpooyéyparrat] 
‘ except when a law has a clause 
added.’ Cf. Androt. § 71. 
dvtwa Set dpxew] The mean- 
ing of this is undoubted, ‘to fix 
the period from which it is to 
come into operation;’ but the 
construction is explained in two 
very different ways. (1) Taylor, 
G. H. Schaefer, and Whiston 
supply dpxovra with évriva, ‘who 
is to be the archon,’ dpxev= 
dpxovra elvat. (2) Jurinus, Do- 
bree, Dindorf and Benseler sup- 
ply xpévov, ‘at what time it 
is to begin,’ dpxew=dpxeoba. 
Common sense is clearly in fa- 
vour of (2); and but for a ten- 
dency, not yet extinct, to fancy 
that ‘refined’ scholarship con- 
sists in preferring the far-fetched 
to the obvious, it is difficult to 
imagine how (1) can ever have 
found favour. The words of 
Demosth. in the next section, 
TOUT 5é Tov yeypayuévoy dpxeuv, 
and in § 44 rov yeypapupévov xpb- 
vov, Clearly point to xpévoy as 
the noun to be supplied; and 
the orator further tells us that 
the beginning of the next year 
(archonship) was often the time 
prescribed. But the phrase ‘in 
whose archonship’ would only 
be natural if there were a possi- 


bility of two or more years in- 
tervening between the passing 
of the law and its taking effect; 
and this of course is not to be 
thought of. Once more, though 
past time was naturally dated 
by archonships, it would be ab- 
surd to say ‘in whose archon- 
ship’ if ‘next year’ were meant: 
the election of an archon might 
still be unsettled only two days 
before his year of office began, 
as we see in the case of Evan- 
dros (cf. Jebb Att. Or. 1. 242, 
below § 138 n.). The only ar- 
gument for (1) is that, in literary 
Attic prose, dpxev can hardly be 
found for dpxecOa : but the ex- 
ceptions are significant, and 
just such as prove the rule. We 
have already seen (§ 39) that 
legal prose may differ from lite- 
rary in points of grammar: so 
may legal and diplomatic prose 
in a preference for antique 
forms. We find accordingly in 
treaties, Thucyd. rv. 118 § 12 
Thy éxexerplay elvar éviaurov, dp- 
xew dé ryvie Thy huéparv: ib. v. 
19 init. “Apxyec 5 rdv crovddv 
€popos IIdewrdd\as, i.e. ‘his 
ephoralty marks the beginning 
of the truce,’ the day being 
added. 

émvypdyas 5é] ‘and the secre- 
tary of the senate shall affix his 
mark to the laws which are now 
established within thirty days,’ 
érvypdwac is thus distinguished 
from dva- and mpos-. 

Tov ypayparéa Tis Bovhfs] Lex 
ap. de Cor. p. 238 § 38, Dict. 


124 KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [8§ 43, 44 


\ “v\ > / / 
RoTrov, Os av Tuyxdvyn ypaypatevov, TpoaypadéTo 
TapaypHua Tov vowov KUpLoV EivaL aTrO THS Nmépas 
Hs éréOn. | 

a a & f 
43 Kalas éxydvtav tév vopwv, & dvdpes Sixactal, 714 
Tov UTapYoVvToV, bbe 6 viv avayvacbels Vvowos wo- 
mepel Sidpice Kal BeRatotépovs érroinoev avTous. 

/ \ 7 3,9? @ ¢ / : ee 4 a 5 
Kerever yap Exactov ad’ %s nuépas éréOn Kvptov civat, 

/ \ 

TAY el TH YpOVvOS TpoayéypaTTat, TOUT Sé TOV. YeE- 

/ 
ypappévov apyeu. 
, Wohin Go aid 5 , ! s ies 
mpoceyéypamto “Tov Oé vopov eivat KUpLov TOvd ato 
n \ \ a] v ? /. \ / ¢ 
Tov peTa TOV viv apxovta.” Uaotepov dé ypadhwyv 6 
TiWels él TovVTOLs TOVOE TOV VOMOV, TOV dveyvwdpévO), 


dua TL; OTL TOAXNOIS TOV Vvopwv 


.’ 5 , / 5 \ ’ \ lal , 
ovx évoutte Sixatoy eivat Tos avTovs TOY voLwV 

, / / 5 
avayeypappévous vaTtepoyv 7) étéOnoav Kupious eivat 

a \ ¢ / > 
aveveyxety etl THY Huépav, ad Hs éréOnoav, Kal 
x \ 

mpoTEepov Troinoat Kuplous 7 0 Oels Exactov HEiwcer. 
, , n / / ¢ > / b] \ 
44 TOUT@ MéVTOL TO Vow TKeacbe ws EvavTios éaTiv 


Antiq. s.v. Grammateus.—rpid- 
kovra nuepov, Androt. § 14 n. 

§ 43. wtorepoy 5é ypddwr] 
Diocles, who framed after these 
laws (é7l rovros referring to the 
laws just described as post-dated 
to the next year, 7oNois...mpoo- 
eyéypamro) that which has just 
been read, in a later enactment 
(vorepov ypddwv) did not think 
it right that any subsequent 
legislation of a retroactive cha- 
racter should be introduced (i.e. 
passed a law prohibiting it). 
The translators in general do 
not clearly distinguish the three 
groups of laws here mentioned: 
(1) pre-existing laws, (2) the de- 
claratory act recited in § 42, 
(3) a later law of the same au- 
thor, the provisions of which 
are explained in the text. 

Tovs avrovs TGv vouwr] ‘that 


statutes which themselves con- 
tained a postponing clause (dva- 
yeypappévous votepov 7 éréOnoay 
kuptous elvac) should be carried 
back to the day of their enact. 
ment, and made to come into 
force before their respective au- 
thors desired.’ K. dvayeypap- 
pévor is not here as in the last 
section, ‘inscribed’ on boards 
or columns, but ‘bearing an 
inscription.’ There is slight 
MS. authority for yeypaupévous, 
which Dobree and Schaefer pre- 
ferred. 

§ 44. The law expressly for- 
bade the date, at which any en- 
actment came into force, to be 
moved back even for a definite 
period; much more for an in- 
definite one; as it is by the 
words ‘if any person has been 
condemned.’ The reasoning 


p.714.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 125 


¢ / 
dv ovTos TéOELKEV. 06 péV ye KENEVEL TOY yeypappevov 
/ >) \ ¢ / bE UMS, x n vr. 5 Seat - 
xpovov 7 Tv nuépav ad ns av TeOH Kupiay eivar’ o 
S aypaev “Kxal* el tive mpootetivntas” wept Tov 
TapednrvOorav Aéyov. Kail ovdé TovM apucer, 
wv / > 4? e b] \ , > 
dpxovta tpocypayas ag’ ov, adda TerroinKev ov 
fal e 
povov mpo THS Nuépas év H TéHeLKE KUPLOY TOV Vopr, 
an ¢ lal 
GANA Kal Tpd Tod yevérOat TWA NuadY* aopLaoToV yap 
a \ LU f t 
aTavTa TOV TapeAnrvOora TpoomrepLreiAnpe Ypovov. 
a x nr \ 
Kaitor ypnv ce, © TipdKpares, ) TodToV pn ypadew 7 
éxeivov vey, oy, Wa 0 Bovret od yévnTat, TavTa Ta 
/ Z bi 
Tpaywata cuvtapatar. Aéye adAov vopor. 


x kal om. Zecum >. 


here is rather absurdly sophisti- §§ 45—55. Second objection 


cal: the notions of an amnesty, 
or of a mitigation of statutory 
penalties, were sufficiently fami- 
liar to the Athenians. Yet it is 
repeated § 74, where see note. 
kuptav] Referring to juépar. 
As the laws are xvpzot, in force, 
so the date of their coming into 
force is xupla, fixed by lawful 
authority. The phrase xvpin 
nuépn for ‘an appointed day’ is 
common in Herodotus: so xupia 
éxkAnola, the regular or fixed 
assembly, opp. ovyxAnrTos. 
év 9 TéGexxe] The Greek has 
here a distinction which is 
missed in English. In the 
phrases dd’ 7s éréOnoar, ad’ js 
dv re0n above, the law itself was 
said to take effect ‘on and after’ 
(amd) a given day. Here the 
legislator is the subject of the 
verb, who can only be said to 
carry the law ‘on’ (év) such a 
day. ; 
mpoomepiethnpe] ‘has further 
included.’ Below, §§ 83, 209. 
Among classical authorsit would 
seem that the word occurs only 
in this speech. 


(see § 41) to the law of Timo- 
crates: its partiality towards 
particular classes of state debt- 
ors. By Athenian law, no re- 
mission or extension of time 
can be granted to such persons, 
except under the most stringent 
conditions: and these Timo- 
crates has systematically vio- 
lated. Three distinct laws (or 
perhaps consecutive portions of 
the same law, see §§ 49 extr. 53 
extr. ) arerecited and commented 
on. The first (§ 45) provides 
that no proposal to restore an 
atimos, or release a public debtor 
or admit him to composition with 
the state, shall be brought in at 
all unless permission has first 
been granted by not less than 
6000 Athenians, voting by ballot. 
Not only was this decree of 
Timocrates introduced without 
leave, but it was ‘rushed through’ 
in indecent and illegal haste, at 
a time and in a place most fa- 
vourable to clandestine legisla- 
tion. By the second recited 
enactment (§ 50) even the right 
of petition is denied to state 


45 


46. 


126 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS.. [§§ 45—47. 


NOMO3. 


[Mndé repli trav atiwav, Oras ypy émuTipous av- 
Tovs elval, unde Tept TOV OpELAcVTwY Tots Deols ) TH 
Snuociw TO” "AOnvaiwy Tepi adécews Tod opANpaTos 
) Takews, €av ur) Whdicapévov “AOnvaiwv thv ddevav 

a \ wy e / By / , 
TpOTov pr éatTov é~axicyirlov, ols adv doEn Kpv- 
BSnv Whdifopévors. tote & eEeivar ypnuatifew Kal 


6 Tt av TH BovrAn Kal TO Snu@ Sox7.| 


BA @ t b) bial \ an OL F 
AdXos ovTOS vos“os, OVK EMV TEPL TOV ATiLaV 


¥Y rov Z Bens. cum 2Yrsv. 


debtors or their friends on their 
behalf. This regulation (the 
orator explains) is rendered ne- 
cessary by the too indulgent tem- 
per of the Athenian people: they 
are obliged, as a matter of prin- 
ciple, to deny themselves the 
luxury of listening to appeals to 
their feelings. But these men, 
driven to insolence by their fears, 
and at their wits’ end, have not 
even the grace to petition: they 
presume to dictate: they take 
away from the State all the dis- 
cretionary power which it now 
possesses of enforcing its claims. 
Lastly (§ 54) the existing law 
forbids appeals or new trials, in 
all cases where there has been a 
judgment ina suit, an account 
once audited, or a question of 
ownership decided, and that 
either by the verdict of a jury 
or privately by arbitration. Ti- 
mocrates is so elaborately and 
amusingly illegal all round that 
his law reads like a deposition 
drawn by himself to prove his 
own guilt. 

§45. NOMOZ. This ‘law’ 
is entirely compiled from the 
next section, with a few explan- 
atory additions. The latter will 


here be chiefly noticed: the ex- 
pressions which come from De- 
mosth. himself will be discussed 
in their proper place. 

Myn6é wept r&v ariwwy] ‘Nor 
concerning the disfranchised 
shall it be lawful to put the 
question for restoration of their 
franchise.’ The words dé7ws 
xpn émitiuovs avrovs elva are 
added, correctly as regards the 
sense, by the compiler. For 
the legislative infinitive comp. 
§ 20 n.: for xpnuarifew § 21 n. 

Tots Beots 7 TH Snuoctw] De- 
mosth. says simply trav épeddv- 
twy. The distinction is an im- 
portant one, as we learn from 
§ 111: the forfeiture being two- 
fold for debts due to the trea- 
sury, tenfold to the gods. 

ots dv Sbén KpvBinv Wndrfope- 
vos] A genuine legal formula 
is here added: the phrase occurs 
in the speech against Neaera 
p. 1375 § 89; cf. Andoc. de 
Myst. § 37. On the ballot as 
essential to privilegia, or laws 
affecting individuals, §§ 18 n., 
59 n. 

ka’ 6 ru av...d0xn] Equivalent . 
to ws dv in § 47: for a similar 
use of kad’ 6 ru see §§ 21, 25. 


Pp. 715.] KATA TIMOKPATOT2. 127 


bl] n 
ovdé THY oderdovT@V Aéyetv OVSE ypnuaTifew repli 
> / a > / *O\ / x \ a 
adécews THY OfAnuaTwY ovde Taews, GV pn THS 
> / / \ / \ 4 x ¢€ 
adelas do00cions, Kal TavTns pn EXaTTOV 7H éEaKLC- 
, @ ’ 
xiriov Wnpicapévov. ovtTos o éyparpey aytixpus, 
n , / n 
Kal et Tie TOV OpEeLrOVT@Y SecpWodD TpoaTETiNTAL, 
5 : 
eivar THY ApEerw Topiaamev@ TOUS eyyunTOpévoUs, OV 
/ bs \ \ / 2O\ / 
mpoteévTos ovdevos mepl TovTwY, ovdé Soleions 
ao / / \ ¢ \ / Tat ~ (9 \ \ 
elas éyewv. Kal 6 pev vopmos, ovd éredday TH 
16 / rs) ¢ x , U 
ddevay evpntal Tis, dwKev ws av BovAnTar TpaTTeL, 
> > ¢ x lal fal \ al / a. na 2 b) 
GAN ws av TH BovrAy Kal TO Snuw doxH’ TOO ovK 
’ / nan 3 b] a / > \ a 
améypnoe ToT adiKeiv povov, et pr) Solelons Tis 
b) s , 
adeias Néyer Kal vouov eiohéper Trepi TOUT@Y, adda 
f a 
kal mpocért ove eis THY Boudry, ovK eis Tov Shwov 
> \ \ U IO\ 3 / al a 
eir@v Tepl ToUTwY ovdev, év TapaBvoT@, THS BovaAns 


§ 46. ragews] ‘composition’ 
K. ‘part payment’ of the debt: 
Wa pépos pev KaraBadr, Td dé 
GdXo cuyxwpnby (be excused), 
Schol. This sense of rdé:s does 
not seem to occur elsewhere: in 
Plato, Laws 844 8, which has 
been quoted as parallel, the 
meaning is rather ‘a fixed quan- 
tity’ of water where the supply 
is limited. 

Tis ddelas SoWeions] From the 
sense of fearlessness or impu- 
nity comes that of permission, 
especially in the form of a bill 
of indemnity granted beforehand 
to enable a person to exercise a 
privilege not belonging to his 
status. Atimoi, resident aliens, 
and slaves, all in short who did 
not enjoy full citizenship, were 
the classes of persons for whom 
this preliminary vote was re- 
quired, See Dict. Antiq. 8.v. 
Adeia. In Androt. § 25 and 
above § 31 ddea is used in an 
ordinary, not a legal sense. 

ob mporebévtos ovdevds] ‘ With- 


out having made any previous 
proposal;’ not simply ‘any pro- 
posal.’ The double process, 
first obtaining permission and 
then making the substantive 
motion, was of the essence of 
Athenian procedure in these 
cases, i.e. whenever the State 
was asked to forego any of its 
rights against individuals. 

§ 47. ef pwy...rAéye] uy of 
course goes with dofeions, not 
with ei: ‘that he makes a mo- 
tion without leave.’ On ei=671, 
§ 32 n. 

els THv Bovdyp...els Tov Sjuov] 
Not a mere substitute for év ry 
Bovdp, &c. but as Jelf, Synt. 
§ 625 ‘in the sense of coram, 
but with the notion of direction 
towards the object, as if it were 
reached or arrived at.’ His ex- 
amples are the present passage 
and Plat. Menex. 232 a, oi wa- 
Tépes...TOANG Kal Kaa arrepjvav- 
To eis mavTas dvOpwrous. 

év mapaBvcry] The Iapapv- 
orov is known as one of the 


128 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 48—51. 


Bev adetpévns, TOv & Adrwv Sia THY EopTHY iepopwn- 


8 vlav avyovTav, NdOpa vo LonveryKev 
48 viav ayovTar, @ vomov elonveryKer. 


KalToe xpnv 


3 2O7/ \ , , A a 
oe, © Tiywoxpartes, eiddTa Tov vouov Tove Ov avéyvwr, 
y / > / / n \ U 
el Tu Sixavoy éBovrou TpaTTEW, TPOTOY jev TPdTodOV 
ypawac8as mpos thv BovAny, cita TO Snuqm Siare- 
a \ tpy2 _¢ > a 5) , 2O/ 
xOnvat, Kal TOO” ovTwS, e¢ Tacw “AOnvaios edoxet, 


al Uy Ud \ 
ypahew Kat vouobereiv Tept TovTwy, Kal TOTE TOvS 


Lal / / lal 
Ovous avayuelvayTa Tods €kK TOV VOmwD, iva TOUTOV 716 
XP > 


Tov TpoToV TpaTT@V, EL Kal TIS érrexelper SeixvdEw 


b] > bd a / \ / + > > 
OUK ETLTNOELOV OYTA TH TOAEL TOV VOMOV, 7) OUY érrL- 


Bovrevew xy éddKets, AAA yvoOuN SiawapToOv arro- 


* «a0 Z Bekk. Bens. cum 3. 


obscurer law-courts, so named 
as being ‘ stuffed away’ in a re- 
mote part of the city (év dpave? 
THs Toews, Pausan. 1. 28. 8). 
According to Pollux (vm. 8. 
121) the Eleven presided in it, 
and there was one court called 
the péoov IlapdBvcroy and ano- 
ther the petfov ILapdBvorov ; but 
Schoemann in his latest work 
(Antig. p. 476) reckons the Met- 
gov and the Mésov as proper 
names of courts distinct from 
the IlapdB8vorov. Here the 
phrase is usually explained, 
after the Scholiast, as=Ad6pq, 
‘in a hole and corner’ as we 
say. Benseler, however, thinks 
it not improbable that, as it was 
a holiday and secrecy was de- 
sired, the Nomothetae may 
really have met on this occasion 
in the IlapdBvorov. And dAdOpa 
is expressed below: which, 
though Dobree wanted to cut it 
out as a gloss on év rapaBioTy, 
is in all the MSS. and seems 
necessary for the rounding off 
of the sentence. 

ddemévns| § 26 n,.—lepounviar] 
§ 29 n. 


§ 48. dvéyywv] Of course 
through the ypaymareds or clerk: 
ef. § 12 n. 

mpocodov ypayacbat] ‘to peti- 
tion the council for an audience’ 
K. or better ‘to have obtained 
a written permission to appear’ 
R. W. A rare sense of both 
words, at least in the Orators. 
The illustrations quoted are 
Isocr. Areop. § 16 rhv rpdcodov 
dmeypayduny and the last sec- 
tion of the same speech rv Te 
mpoaodov érounodunv Kal Tovs dd- 
yous elpnxa tovrovs. In these 
instances the middle is causal 
and means ‘to procure a writ- 
ten answer’ (of course in reply 
to a written application, but 
that is not expressed). 

Tovs xpovous avapelvavra] At 
least 19 days, from the first as- 
sembly of the month till the 
third: §§ 21 n., 26 n. 

wa...€ddxers] Androt, §§ 21 n., 
28. 
decxvderv] 
Above, § 35. : 

bn obv...ye] ovv followed by 
ye is nearly=the compound 
yotv. The same may be said 


Androt. § 34 n. 


49 


50 


p.716.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 129 


tuxeiv. viv 6€ TO AAOpa Kal Taxd Kal Tapa Tors 
vomous éuBarelv tov vopov eis Tovs vomous Kal pr 
Ocivar Tracav adypnoat cavTov THY cvyyveuNV’ Tots 
yap dxovew dpaptovot péterts cuvyyvopns, ov Tois 
émiBovrevoacw, 0 od viv eiAn at TOLWY. AAA yap 
avtixa ép® tmepl TovTwv. viv S avaylyywoKe Tov 
éEns vomov. 
NOMO3X. 
[Hav dé tis txetevn ev TH Bovdg 7H ev TO Sypw 


¢ SoM ) 8 an / 
Tepl ov Sixactypiov 7) 4 BovrAn 7H 6 Simos Katéyva, 
>\ \ b) ‘ PR \ e / \ > n »” 5 
édy péev avros 6 oprov ikeTe’n Tply éexticaL, EvderEw 


of the combination d\n’ ovv in 
certain cases where dAAd ap- 
pears to be redundant, as in 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 86 rods wév mpw- 
Tous xpdvous aN’ ovv mpocetot- 
o0v0” wiv eivac pido; ‘during 
the first period, at any rate, 
they pretended to be your 
friends.’ 

§ 49. 7@...éuBareiv...cal pn 
Getvar] ‘by foisting your law 
into the statute-book, instead 


- of passing it’ in the regular 


way. Oras K.: ‘I will not say 
passing, but foisting &c.’ 

etAnvat] This unusual word 
occurs also in Deinarch. ¢, De- 
mosth. § 103. 

Tov és vouov] The Scholiast 
remarks, rightly it would seem, 
that the law in the next section 
is (he should have said, purports 
to be) a continuation of that in 
845. Cf. § 53 rdv werd Todrov 
épeéens. 

§ 50. NOMO2. So far as it 
is compiled from genuine mate- 
rials, this ‘law’ is an important 
authority for our knowledge of 
the process called Endeixis. 
So jealous was the Athenian 
people of any ‘contempt’ (in 


W. D. 


the legal sense) of its sovereign 
decrees, that if was made an 
offence even to petition for re- 
lief from a fine or a judgment- 
debt. Till it was discharged 
the debtor laboured under an at 
least partial disqualification: 
and any attempt to exercise 
political rights or hold office 
laid him open to this prosecu- 
tion. If he wished to prove 
that the sentence ought to be 
reversed, or that money was due 
to him from the state, he had 
first to gain a locus stendi for 
his petition by a literal com- 
pliance with the decree of the 
dicastery, senate, or assembly 
as the case might be (zovely ra 
dixaca ovyy, below § 52). 

6 é6¢Awv] For the distinction 
between 6¢Aavand éde(Awycomp. 
Androt. § 34 n., above § 39 n. 
Reiske not knowing this wished 
here to read é¢eiAwy against all 
MSS.: for which he is corrected 
by G. H. Schaefer. The latter 
refers to two passages in the 
speech against Theocrines: p. 
1328 § 21 rdv vouov Tov am’ éxel- 
yns KedevovTa THs Nuépas dpelrew, 
ad’ ns av Spdy, and nearly the 


9 


130 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 50—53. 


b] a 
elvat avtov, Kabdtrep éav Tis ddheiiov TO Snpooio 
\ : a 
nrratntar’ é€av & adXos vrrép TOD GhANKOTOS ixeTEdH 
na / ’ n 
mpl éxticat, Snuwoocia éstw avtod y ovcia daca. 
2N\ , a / al \ \ > 
éav O€ TIS Ta mpoédpwv O@ Tivt THY émLyelpoToviay, 
x b] fal a , x 
) avT® T® WHAHKOTL 7 
éxticat, aTYysos EoTo. | 
"RB \ »” ie 5 5 \ > Na U 
oT meV Epyov, @ avdpes SixacTal, ei Tepl* tap- 
TOV TOV VopwwV, ols odTOS évavTioy cicevnvoyxey, épod- 
ee: Te / \ oo \ \ n 
pev’ a&vov 8, et wept Tov Kal addXov, Kal Trept TovdE 
dv viv avéyva diedOciv. 6 yap Tov vopmov TodTOY, 
avdpes “A@nvator, Gels HSde0 THY piravOpwriav Kal 
THY TpacTnTa THY vucTépav, Kal Sid TavTnV éEdpa 
\ a tae a. Aes bi \ / 
Tepl TOAAGY Vas ExdvTas dn ToTé weyada CnuLwo- 


A ¢€ \ > / \ 
QXX@ UTEP ExElvov, TPW 


® elrep wept Bekk. Illud ZTOQr. 


same words p. 1337 § 49. We 
see from these the summary 
character of Athenian legisla- 
tion: no period of grace in which 
to find the money, at least after 
judgment had been given, but 
immediate loss of civic rights 
until it was paid. 

Hrudknra:]=dxdgy, as nraala 
is often synonymous with 6é:xa- 
orypiov. The word is quoted 
from Lysias by Harpocration, 
and occurs several times in 
Aristophanes. On the spirit of 
this enactment, and the case of 
a poor man capitally punished 
for earning a few obols as a 
‘dicast, see the note on Androt. 
§ 48. 

5Q...79v émtxetporoviay]=ém- 
xetporoveiy § 39. This sense of 
the word betrays the gram- 
marian: ‘to put the question’ 
is properly érupndigfew (Androt. 
§ 9; below, § 54). The subst. 
émivygiors is not found in clas- 
sical writers. The Attic usage 
of émxetporovia (§ 20 ff.) is 


limited to the phrases émy. 
Tov vouwy and émy. Tov apxav. 

Gtysos éorw] It was only in 
this case that the Proedri were 
made responsible for the ques- 
tions they put to the vote: in 
other cases the remedy was a 
ypaph mapavéuwv against the 
proposer of the law, Androt. 
§ 9 n. 

§ 51. “Eore pev epyov] ‘It 
would be a job:’ ‘I should have 
enough to do:’ ‘Es ist eine 
schwere Ausgabe,’ Benseler: 
rather than as K. ‘it would be 
tedious.’ 

wept moANwv...40n more] ‘ da- 
durch schon in so manchen Fail- 
len’ Benseler: ‘that by reason 
of it you had on so many oc- 
casions before then submitted to 
serious loss’ K. This usage of 
mept is rather uncommon: a 
tolerably near parallel is Plat. 
Gorg. 467 p “Addo Tx ody oUTH 
kal wept mdavrwy; ‘is it not so 
in all cases?’ quod attinet ad 
omnia, Heindorf. 


P. 717.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


131 


52 Oévtas. Povrcmevos 5n undepiav tpddacw Tod Ta 


53 


a a \ \ Lal / 
KOWa KAKOS eyveuy vToNLTrety, TOS HETA TOV VOMOV 717 


/ cad 
Kploe Kal dSucactnpio pn Sixaca Tro.eivy éyvwopévous 
: vy n a ’ / Lal ¢€ J, 5 , 
ovK weTo Sely THS EvNOElas THS VuEeTépas aTroNaveLD, 
a \ al e / 54 
TO Seicbar kal peta cupdpopds ixerevew éyovtas 
> \ b] 2°46 ,’ n ) kak | > a eee wv 
apopunv, GAN bArws areire pT avT@ pT aXXo 
/ / ¢ \ A , 
pndevi un? ixerevew pnte Aéyew UTép TOV ToLOvTMD, 


aXXAa Torey Ta Sikata oiyh. 


> / »” , 
el Towuv Tis &pad 


¢ an , a x > a / > ¢ a 
Umas TOTEpOLs WAGANOV aV ELKOTwWS TrolnoaLO OTLOdD, 
an / al 95 > 
Tots Seopevots 7) Tots émutattovaw, old bt. dynoaiT 
a * \ \ \ a \ > 
av Tots Seouévos* TO pwéev yap ypnoTav, TO & avady- 


§ 52. Tod ra Kowd Kakds 
éxew] ‘for the public interest 
suffering:’ i.e. the finances, 
which alone are the subject of 
the laws discussed in §§ 45—55. 

Tovs pmeTa TOV vbmwv...éyvw- 
omévous] ‘who in accordance with 
law, after a regular trial and 
by the sentence of a court have 
been convicted of misconduct,’ 
We might also translate kpicec 
kal dixacryply as a hendiadys, 
‘by the verdict of a jury.’ 

evndelas] ‘ good-nature,’ is the 
piravOpwria and rpadérns of the 
last section regarded from a con- 
temptuous point of view, An- 
drot. § 78. Ascribed to Athe- 
nian juries, 1. Aristog. p. 773 
§ 12 dd ris cuviOovs eidynOetas 
eloehnruObTes kabedetcbe, ‘if you 
come into court and take your 
seats in your usual easy temper:’ 
joined to dmodavew, Aeschin., 
Timarch, § 56, droXedauKds, ds 
Aéyerar, THs éxelvov evnOelas, 
; having made a profit out of 
it. 

movetvy TH Sikara] ‘to comply 
with the law,’ on pain of being 
punished for contempt. The 
affirmative verb is supplied from 


the negative dmetre: cf. Soph, 
Oed. Tyr. 236 rdv dvip dravdd 
Tobrov—pyr’ eladéxecOar pyre 
Tpocpuvety twa | Obey F ar 
oixwy mdvras: and other ex- 
amples in Jelf, Synt. § 895, 9, 
Madvig, Synt. § 213. P 

§ 53. morépos...driodv] ‘ for 
which class of persons you 
would be more likely to do 
anything,’ dat. commodi. 

TO pev yap xpnorwav, 7d 6 
dvdvdpwr] i.e. Td wer yap SetoOae 
xpnorav, ro 8 émirdrrev davdy- 
dpwv. I should not take xpy- 
ory as ‘ kind-hearted’ K. ‘ gut- 
herzigen’ Benseler, but rather 
‘honest, conscientious,’ com- 
paring Fals. Leg. p. 390 § 157 
=173 ofS’ avayxacbévr at’rav 
ovdéva Set Soxet’v xpnorov elvacTy- 
Mepov : ib. p. 430 § 277 = 315 é¢’ 
hutcela xpnorov ‘half honest.’ 
It is nearly = pérpios, ‘law- 
abiding,’ Androt. § 25 n. The 
connexion of ideas between cow- 
ardice’ and ‘dictation’ (é- 
Trarrew) is not quite obvious: 
the meaning apparently is, that 
fear of the consequences of their 
actions urges men to override 
the laws. 


9—2 


132 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 53—55. 


Spav avOpdrav épyov éotiv. ovKody of vopor per 
dmavtes Tpootattovaew & xp) Totety, of TLOév Tes SE 
Tas ixernplas Séovrat. ef Tolvuv ixerevew ovK e&eoTww, 
H Tov vomov y éritaypa éyovta ciodéperv ; eyo pev 
OUK oimat. Kal yap aioxypov Tepl wv wndé xapifer Pas 
Seiy vireiAndbate, wept ToUTwY aKovTav budv éav & 
tives BovrAovtat tpayOjvat. 
Aéye tov wera TodTov édeens. 


NOMOSX. 


["Ocav Sixn mpdtepov éyéveto  Ovva 7 S1ad.- 


ol tiOévres 5é Tas ixernplas] 
Above, §12 . The placing the 
suppliant bough might even 
sometimes be a capital crime, 
Andoc. de Myst. § 110. 

el...oux éecrw] Androt. § 18 
n. 
q Tov...clopépew;] ‘can it be 
permitted to introduce a law, 
which implies command?’ The 
argument of §§ 45—55 is sum- 
med up in these words and in 
the following, rept dv pndé xapl- 
fecba Sety breiinpare, ‘in cases 
where you have deemed it right 
to abstain even from acts of 
grace.’ The denial of the right 
of petition, when a judgment 
had once been pronounced, in- 
volved @ fortiori the rejection 
of what would now be called 
‘relief bills,’ of which the law 
of Timocrates was a glaring 
instance. 

oiua] A silent correction of 
Dindorf’s: the MSS. and the 


other critical editions read oto- | 


po. Of. §§ 68, 72. 
Tov pera ToOrov Epetfs] § 49 n. 
§ 54. Here, as in § 50, the 
substance of the ‘law’ is com- 
piled from Demosth. himself in 
the context, with the irrelevant 


and even nonsensical addition 
pndé Karnyopetv édvTwv K.T.r. 
"“Oowv dixn mporépov éyévero} 
In Athenian law there was little 
opportunity for bringing . ap- 
peals properly so called: the 
verdict of the dicasts was gene- 
rally final and irrevocable: the 
same issue could not be raised 
again, except in an indirect 
manner. The exceptions may ~ 
be classed as a ‘motion for a 
new trial’ (dikn dvdéixos, ava- 
dixia, wadwéicetv) and an appeal 
in the stricter sense (&eois). 
The former was granted (1) 
if the prosecutor had gained a 
verdict by default (épjunv Aay- 
xdvew), and the defendant could 
prove that such default was 
not owing to his negligence; 
in which case he was said ép7- 
ynv avtiiaxetv, Demosth. c. Ze- 
noth. p. 889 § 27. (2) If the 
loser convicted his opponent’s 
witnesses by a dixn pevdouap- 
rupvav, he might next proceed 
against the principal himself by 
a Olkn Kaxorexviwy for suborna- 
tion of perjury ([Demosth.] c. 
Everg. et Mnesib. p. 1139 § 1, 
ce. Timoth. p. 1201 § 56): and 
if again successful, might ob- 


P, 717.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


133 


Kacia tepl Tou év ducactnpio, 7 idia H § 1a, ) TO 
p nple, 7} iSia ) Snpocia, } To 
> : 

Snudowov amédoTo, pa) eicayew tepi TovTwy eis TO 

Py , Ie b] U n ? / dé 
ixacTHnpiov pnd éerrupnhiley Tdv dpyovTav pndéva, 

pndé KaTnyopeiy E@vTwv & ovK édow of voor) ~ 
‘ A tal 
Tipoxparns Tolwuv, @oTep paptuplay ov adoxel 
> n 

ypapav, evO0s apyopevos TOD vouov TavayTia EOnKe 


tain a rehearing of the original 
suit. 

The appeal called é¢eors was 
allowed only in the following 
cases; (1) From a decision of 
the public arbitrators (d:arrnrat 
k\npwrol): (2) From a dcayy- 
gists or decision of a man’s 
Snuorat adverse to his rights of 
citizenship: (3) From an ém- 
Bod or fine summarily imposed 
by a magistrate; but not from 
the tiunua or fine assessed by 
a jury: (4) In the dixac dd cup- 
Bod\wv, when one of the parties 
was a citizen of a foreign state, 
between which and Athens the 
agreement called c¥uBora exist- 
ed. The accounts we have of 
these appeals, mostly derived 
from Pollux, are by no means 
clear. 

(Condensed, with some cor- 
rections, from Dict. Antigq. s. v. 
Appellatio (Greek). See further 
details under the respective head- 
ings: Pseudomartyrion, Kako- 
technion (the latter also in Da- 
remberg and Saglio), Diaetetae, 
Diapsephisis, Epibole, Dikai apo 
Symbolon: and comp. Sandys’ 
Introd. to 1. and mm. Steph. in 
Demosth. part 11.). 

e0Ovva] This word is rare in 
the singular, especially in the 
technical sense of ‘ examination 
on quitting office,’ ‘audit of 
accounts.’ We find however in 
Lys. Or. xxv. § 30 moddds 52 
apxas dpxovres ovdeuas evOdvnv 


d.ddacw: and in Aeschin. Ctes. 
§ 17 ef un tes éorly evvolas ev- 
Ova. The forms evdivy (plur. 
evdivac) or edfuva (plur. ef@uvac) 
are deemed equally good by 
Shilleto on Fals. Leg. p. 346 
§ 52: Dindorf and the Zurich 
Editors prefer the latter without 
absolutely rejecting the other. 
Hence, in the passages just 
cited, Dind. leaves ev@uvny in 
Lysias where all MSS. agree, 
but reads ei@uva in Aeschines 
from one corrected MS. The 
Scholiast likewise favours ev- 
Ovva: mept de Tov révou Tis 
evOuvns 45n elrouev Sre mpowap- 
oftverac. 

diaiikacta] Above, § 12 n. 

4 Td Snudcroy] i.e. 7 8oa 7d 
Snudovov aarédoro. The cases in 
which a rehearing is here re- 
fused are (1) judgment in an 
ordinary suit, dix: (2) the case 
of an outgoing magistrate, de- 
clared by the e#@vvo. or auditors 
to owe monies to the State: 
(3) questions of ownership: (4) 
sales by the treasury. These 
last would refer to confiscated 
property (ovcia Snuocla § 50): 
no action would lie against 
the purchaser of such: the 
State’s having ordered the sale 
would constitute a ‘ parliament- 
ary title,’ so to speak. 

uh elodyew] §§ 10, 14: for the 
construction, §§ 20, 45. 


pnd érepnoglgev] § 50 n. 


134 


TOUTOLS. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 55—57. 


¢ / ’ bia) . LYS. x vA a 8 
O MEV ye OUK Ea TeEpL MY av aTrak yv@ diKa- 


oTnplov Tadw xpnuaTivew* 6 8 éyparpe, Kai el Tut 
f \ A 
TpooreTiunTat KaTa vomov 1) Kata  Whnpiopa, TOV Sjjwov 


) (Cewv, 0 Lev eyvo TO SiKacty 718 
TovT@ xpnuaTifer, OTs & wéev ey Kao TH pLoVv 


AvOnceTal, KaTacTHaEL O eyyuntas 6 odrAdv. Kab 6 
Bev vomos und erupndifew hyol taév apyovtwv Tapa 
Tavta pndéva’ 6 8 eypae Tois mpoddpos érrav- 
ayKes, dv Tis KaOvoTH, Tpocdyeww, Kal mpooéyparvev 


/ 39> 
“OmroT av tus BovAnTaL. 


§ 55. xpnuarifer] As ap- 
plied to the presiding magis- 
trates, this word has been ex- 
plained §§ 21n.,45. The phrase 
Tov Sihuov rovTw xpnuatif~ew is 
unusual, but merely extends 
the same notion: ‘the people 
shall deal with the matter on 
his behalf.’ K. 

dws d pev éyvw] ‘so that the 
decision of the court may be 
reversed, and the accused party 
may put in bail:’ K. nearly. 
MS. % with some others reads 
KatacTynoy: but usage, and \vA7- 
cera: preceding, are decisive in 
favour of the future. On this 
question, generally referred to 
as ‘Dawes’s canon,’ see Jelf, 
Synt. § 812, Madvig, Synt. § 
123. Cobet Var. Lect. p. 108 
will not hear of the aor. subj. 
even as an exception, but it 
must be admitted that there are 
passages, such as Plato, Protag. 
813 c, where all’ MSS. are 
against him.—o 6¢dav] § 50 n. 

éypawe...mpordyew] ‘provided 
(inserted a clause to the effect) 
that the Proedri shall present 
the bail’ to the people for ap- 
proval. Dobree wanted to read 
Tovs mpoédpous, as in § 39: if 
such uniformity were required, 
the usage of Demosth. himself 
is to be preferred to that of the 


interpolator of these documents. 

§§ 56—58. The law of Ti- 
mocrates sets aside decisions of 
the courts which have already 
been carried out. It thus not 
merely introduces a dangerous 
confusion into the administration 
of the laws, but insults the honest 
juries of constitutional times by 
treating them precisely like the 
hated Thirty, whose acts were 
declared null and void. 

The common-sense objections 
to retroactive legislation had 
been already stated in §§ 42—44; 
in their present form they are 
merely ad invidiam arguments 
intended to prejudice the jury. 
Demosthenes must have seen 
clearly the difference between 
the revolutionary enactments 
which unsettle the relations of 
property, and the mere proposal 
that a certain class of debtors 
to the State should be treated 
less harshly, and that this mea- 
sure of relief should include 
those already indebted. But it 
did not suit him to rest his case 
solely on its merits; we are 
reminded of the words of the 
Second Argument, 7d wev vduu- 
bov Kepddatov évrehéotara elpya- 
orat, TO dé Olkaov kal 7d cvp- 
gepov kal rd Suvardy addAnAows 
oupmdéxerac (p. 699, 5). 


P. 718.] 


Aéy’ Etepov vopov. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


135 


NOMOX. 
[Tas Sixas kal tas Svaitas, boar éeyévovto ért 
Tots vomols ev SnwoKpaToupévyn TH TorEL, Kuplas ivan, | 
Ov gnot Tiyoxparns, ovKovy dtocois y av Se- 


ood TpocTiunOy. 
Aéye. 


NOMOS. 
[Omdca 8 érl tév tpidxovt’ érpaxOn 7 Sixn 
eSixacOn, 7) idia 7 Snuoola, adxvpa eivat.] 


"Exrioyes. ei7ré ot, 


, , U \b 
akovoavtTes pnoaite Kal 


/ / U ay 

ti Sewetatov twavtes av 
/ 

padict av amevéaiobe ; 


b] an \ / > 
ovyl TadTa TA TpadyuaTa, ArEp HY eT TOV TpLaKoVTA, 


pn yevérOar ; eywy otmat. 


¢ na 4 
0 youv vos“os ovToal ev- 


> kal rl Bekk. cum yp. =. 


§ 56. év Snuoxparoumévy TH 
moder] Opp. to éml trav Tpid- 
kovra, and probably also to the 
earlier oligarchy of 411. Comp. 
§§ 42 n. 76n. 


érpdx0n] ‘voted’ (bestimmt) ; 


rather than ‘done’ expresses 
the meaning of this word. The 
reference is to the ‘ acta’ asthe 
Romans would have called them 
or judicial decrees of the Thirty: 
i.e. mostly to the executions and 
confiscations decreed by a pack- 
ed assembly at their bidding. 

9 dixn) Our law-compiler is 
here not happy in his Greek. 
Reiske explains this by oréon 
dixn; but in Attic we should ex- 
pect omdcat dixa: or ef Tis Sixn. 

§ 57. dxovcayres] ‘When 
you heard’ (that law read, like 
éveduunOnr avaryrvyvwoKopevov Tod 
ynglouaros § 28), ‘what would 


you (naturally) declare to be 
the most monstrous thing?’ 
The very mention of the Thirty 
would remind an Athenian 
audience that this was the bit- 
terest passage in their history. 
This is substantially Benseler’s 
explanation (die Ihr das gehért) 
and seems more exact than K.’s 
‘what would you say was the 
most dreadful thing you ever 
heard ?’ 

bn yevéoOa] pn is added be- 
cause of areviacbe: ‘ deprecate 
the repetition of.’ K. rightly. 
So in the next sentence dreire 
i ] Kbpia elvac: above § 31 
ddevay TOU un TL Tabet. 

6 yodv véuos ovToc!] -yobr ex- 
plains éywy ofua. ‘I think so; 
at least this seems to be the 
meaning of the law’ &c. 


58 


136 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [S$ 57—59. 


AaBovpevos, as ewot Soxe?, TO TovwodTov ametme TA 
mpayOévra én’ éxeivav wn Kipta elvat. ovTool Tol- 
vuv THY avTHY KaTéyvo Tapavouiav THV éml THS dy- 
poxpatias TweTpaypévar, nvTep TOV er éKelvov VpeEls’ 


Opoiws your aKkupa Trotel. 


Y / / 4 
KaiTo. TL Pnoopev, @ 


bd ? Lal n , \ ‘ : ee 
avipes "AOnvaior, TodTov KupLov Tov vomov éagavTEs 
\ \ 

yevéoOar; woTepov ta Sixactypia, 2 Snwoxpatov- 

pens THS TWordCwS EK TOV OMMpOKOTHOY TANpOUTAL, 

TavTa adiKkypata Tos éri TOV TpLaKovTa abiuKely; 

Kal Tas ov Sedov; adra Sixains endiclar; Tivos 
> 4 \ , a t / , 

ovy évexa Tov AUaovTa TadTa Vouov OécOar dynooper; 


> eee Bg 
WAV ef TOUTO TLS ElTrOL, 
éoriv eltrety. 


evAaBovpevos...... Td Totodrov] 
‘providing against such a con- 
tingency’ K. 

ovTost rolyuy] ovrocl is now 
the defendant Timocrates, not 
the law. 

katéyvw] ‘imputed the same 
illegality.’ According to De- 
mosthenes, T. had implicitly 
set aside all judicial decisions 
by reversing some. 

§ 58. édcavres] ‘if we allow’ 
...The confirmation of T.’s law 
would depend on the result of 
the present trial. 

éx T&v éuwpoxdtwv mdnpotrat] 
‘are impanelled from among 
those who have sworn (the He- 
liastic oath):’ not simply ‘of 
sworn men.’ Comp. § 21 n.: 
§§ 149—151. Benseler, who is 
usually careful in noticing the 
variations of MSS. and Edd., 
here reads xAnpovrar without re- 
mark: not accidentally, as is 
shewn by his version ‘durch 
Loos besetzt werden.’ If the 
reading of all the MSS. (7\7- 
poure in 2 is no real variant, 
§ 85n.) needed any justification, 


pavévtes’ AAO yap ovK 719 


it might be found in § 92 écxa- 
oTnpia TAnpoUTeE. 

éyndlcba] Sicacrynpia is the 
subject both of déixety and of 
éyngicba: ‘shall we say that 
they commit the same crimes 
as under the Thirty (whose ac- 
complices in guilt they were) or 
that they have given just ver- 
dicts?’ 

Oécba pjcouev] The subject 
of 6éc0a: being the same as of 
orjcouev is not expressed. ‘If 
so, what reason shall we assign 
for passing a law to rescind 
their judgments? unless we 
were to say it was an act of 
madness.’ K, nearly. With pya- 
vévres supply é0éuePa, not Oé- 
0a: which would require pavéy- 
tas after elzroz Tis dv. 

§§ 59, 60. The argument 
against privilegia, just touched 
upon in § 18 ém maior Tov adrov 
vouov TiWévar Kedever, re-stated 
and amplified. The law forbids 
the proposal of any statute not 
applying to all Athenians, un- 
less by the votes of 6000 citizens, 
taken by ballot. The very word- 


p. 719.] 


Aéy’ ddXov vopov. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


137 


NOMOS. 
[Mndeé vopov é&eivar én’ avdpi Ocivar, éav un Tov 
auToy émi wacw ’A@nvaios TiOn°, ) >Wndicapévov 
py) eratrov éEaxicyirdlwv, ois av Sd—n KpvBdnv 


npifopévors. | 


* > 
Ovk éG vopov add’ 9 Tov avTov TLWévas KaTa TOV 


TONLTOY TavTwV, KaABS Kal 


SnmoTiKas Réywv. 


© jom. libri. A—ndrgouévois om. Dind. 


ing of this decree of Timocrates 
shows that he has not complied 
with the enactment: he excepts 
by name the farmers of tazes, 
the lessees of the revenue, and 
their sureties. There is no pre- 
tence that such persons are the 
greatest offenders, the least de- 
serving of relief from the law of 
imprisonment. Your proposal 
stands disclosed for what it is: 
a barefaced attempt to favour 
peculators, or rather open plun- 
derers, of the public money. 

§ 59. riO7, 7 Yndicapérwr] See 
the various readings. Dindorf’s 
excision of the latter part of this 


document is certainly too bold: - 


and (though as a rule adhering 
to his text) I have here followed 
the other recent Editors in re- 
taining the passage as it stands 
in the MSS. with Reiske’s very 
slight correction. It is true 
that in Aristocr. p. 649 § 86 the 
law is quoted without the addi- 
tional words: and that De- 
mosth. did not need to cite 
them, perhaps was not likely to 
cite them (as weakening the 
force of his argument) for his 
present purpose. But we have 
to bear in mind, not what the 
clerk was likely to have read at the 


bidding of Demosthenes (which, 
it is now admitted, no one 
really knows) but what the com- 
piler of these ‘laws’ thought fit 
to insert in the text of his au- 
thor, as his own notion of what 
had been read. Similar clauses 
are found in the law of § 45, 
and however irrelevant, may 
very well bave been inserted 
here. Without some correc- 
tion, however, the reading of 
the MSS. yields no sense: it 
fails to mark the distinction be- 
tween the general rule and the 
exceptional privilegium. The 
author of the ‘Leges Atticae,’ 
Samuel Petit, proposed to insert 
édv wn before Wndicauévwy, as in 
Andoc, de Myst. § 87 where the 
law is quoted éay ux Tov adrov 
éml waow ’AOnvalos, édyv jut) éfa- 
KioxiAlors SdEn KpvBinv Wndica- 
pévots. Reiske’s correction ac- 
counts best for the reading of 
the MSS. as 7 might so easily 
have dropt out after 7.07: 
otherwise the inelegant repeti- 
tion of éayv u7) may be defended 
by § 45 and Andoc. l. ¢. 

kara Tv twodkiTav wdvTwv]= 
éml waow ’AOnvaios above, ‘ ap- 
plying to.’ For this use of xara 
comp. 1. Phil. p. 68 § 9 6 xa 


60 


138 KATA TIMOKPATOT®S. [§§ 59—61. 


\ 
@omep yap ths adAns ToruTelas tcovy péreotuv 
Te / 
ExaoT@, oUT@ Kal TovT@Y icov peTéxey EKacTOY 
> a > \ 
afwot. 8 os pév Tolvuy odtos eicédepe Tov voor", 
¢ a a a \ , 
Upeis ovdev €mod yelpov yiyvdoxKete’ avev dé TovTa@V 
> 
AUTOS Wmonrynoe p27) él Tao TOV avTov TeOELKévat, 
TAnV Tept TOV TEAXYWVaY Kal TOY pLCOovpPEéEvOV Kal 
A / > tal lal , fal / 
TOV TOUTMY eyyunToY xpha0at Tpocypaas TO VOM. 
> na ¢ Pace > / \ ’ b] x 4 
ovKodY O7dT elol TLvEes ods adoplfes, ovK av ert 
y 3 \ a \ > \ / \ \ 709 
eins él maot Tov avTov TeBeikds. Kal pny ovd 
a x ¢ n a 
éxeivd y av eltrois, ws bcols Secpod TpooTmarat, 
? lal 
TOUT@V MAALOTA 1) TA péyloTA AdLKODTLY Of TENOVAL. 
TOD 
A / a 
yap Snov “arXov of mpodidovTes TL TOV KOLWaY, O+ 
fa) e \ \ a 
Tovs yovéas KaKodvTeEs, ol wn Kabapds Tas xeipas 


, fal \ n 
@OTE LOVOLS AUTOIS fn peTadodVaL TOU Vopmov. 


4 roy vouov om. Zeum TAZ et pr. k rv Dindorfii operae. 


péyworov éote kad’ dudv éyKwdpmor: 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 50 of xara An- 
pocbévovs Exava. Jelf, Synt. 
§ 628, 2. 

Kad@s cal Snuorikds] Above 
§ 34 dixaiws Kal opddpa virep Tov 
Snuov. Below § 69.—dvev 6é 
Trovrwy] ‘and besides:’ ef. 
Aristoer. p. 657 § 112. 

TEAWYOV..... [LT Oovpevwr.... eY- 
yunrav] Compare § 40, where 
a further class of revenue offi- 
cers, the éxNoyets or éxdéyorTes 
are mentioned, and picfovpévwy 
is expanded into trav Ta pmucO0- 
oiua pcOoupévay. 

§ 60. of mpodiddvres Te THY 
xowav] Howvague these charges 
might be is well shown in C. R. 
K.’s article ‘ Prodosia’ in Dict, 
Antig. The punishment was 
usually death: but we find be- 
low § 127 cal mpodoctas ye adovs 
tpla TddavTa dmrérice. 

Tovs yovéas Kaxovvtes] Dict. 
Antiq. s.v. ‘Kakosis.’ If we 


may trust Andocides, those 
found guilty of xdkwots yovéwy 
were among a large class of - 
offenders of whom he says ovrou 
mdvres GTiwoL Hoay TA CwmaTa, 
Ta 5é xpnuara eTxov, de Myst. 
§ 74. And this Atimia involved 
exclusion from the Agora, be- 
low § 103, Androt. § 77. 

un Kabapas Tus xetpas] Homi- 
cide, even when purely acciden- 
tal or excusable, was regarded in 
the religious point of view as a 
pollution of the city and terri- 
tory of Athens, and required cere- 
monial expiation: a principle 
common to the Hebrewand other 
ancient codes. The domxal dia 
will be fully treated in the notes 
to the speech against Aristo- 
crates, of which they form an 
important portion: for the pre- 
sent it will be enough to refer 
to Dict. Antig. s. v. ‘Phonos;’ 
and for later views, Schoemann 
Antig. pp. 467—471. 


61 


P. 720.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 139 


3 \ : a 
éyovtes, eicvovtes 8 eis THY ayopay, adixodaly. ois 
\ , 
amacw ot pev UmapyovTes vopmot Seapov Tpodeyouaty, 
bs n / 

6 8€ cds AeAVTOa Sidwow. arr éevTadla Tad 

/ ¢ \ g b] ‘0 & \ \ \ \ rv / 

KaTapnvues UTép wv éTiMeis* Sid yap TO py TEAWVN- 

> \ An b 

cavras opeinewy avTovs, GAA KrEWarTas, waddov 8 

apracavtas Ta xpnpata, Sia TovT ovK éeppovTicas, 
OiMal, TOV TEA@VOD. 


TIoArovs 8 av tis Exyou vomous ett Kai KAaAN@S 720 


»” U ® a > / > \ a e 
éyovtas Sevxvivat, ots Taow évavtios éxtivy Ov ovTOS 
/ bd] - > \ \ > \ / > a 
Téetxev. GAN lows eyo pev, eb Tepl TaVTwY Epa, 
bd] / \ n ? 3 / ed CW 
éEwaOnoopat twept tod pnd eEmityndevov bros vpIiv 
an a ¢ / ad 
elvat Tov vowoy EiTreiv, Vuiv S Opolws Evoyos paveiras 
a v / / > / 
TH ypadn, Kal et évl TOY OVTMY VOmaV évavTios éoTiV. 
A = al \ \ ” zal \ > 2 
TOS ovv pot SoKel; TOs pev AdXovs eav, Trept 5 ov 


AeAUc Oa SiSwow] ‘grants an 
immediate release,’ The perf. 
infin. implies the continuance 
of the action as well as its sud- 
denness: such prisoners are to 
be, and to remain, released. So 
Thucyd. 1. 87 § 6 9 dtayrdpn 
THs éxk\nolas Tov Tas omovdds 
AedvoOar. Comp. Jelf, Synt. 
§ 399, 2: Madvig, Synt. § 171 
Rem. 1. Goodwin, Moods and 
Tenses, § 18, 3. 

vmép wy érlOes] ‘in whose in- 
terests you proposed’ the law: 
like 6’ ods ovros elcépepe in the 
last section. 

§§ 61—65. Time would fail 
me to speak of all the laws to 
which that of Timocrates is re- 
pugnant. I will take but one 
more example, a law formerly 
passed by himself, which will 
make him his own accuser. In 
it he increased the stringency of 
the proceedings in cases of im- 
peachment (eicayyeNia), and pro- 
vided that those sentenced to a 
Jine should be imprisoned until 
it was paid. Such inconsistency 


shows that he would do anything 
for the sake of gain, and is ut- 
terly shameless. He deserves 
the penalty of malefactors who 
confess their guilt, that he should 
be punished without trial: for 
the repugnancy of his two laws 
with one another amounts toa 
confession of guilt. 

§ 61. ewoOjooua ... elev] 
The usual construction would 
be rov un eiretv: and the simple 
infinitive is especially rare after 
the passive voice. The exam- 
ples with kxaréyew, Kkwdveww 
and the like, in Jelf, Synt. 
§ 664, and the passage quoted 
here by G. H. Schaefer, Soph. 
Aj. 69 éyo yap 6uudrwv drocrpé- 
gous | avydsamelpiw onv mpdcopw 
elovdetv, are for this reason not 
exactly parallel. 

meplt Tov...elvar] ‘on its being 
contrary to public policy,’ as in 
§$ 1, 33, 48, 68:=as Kal péyaNn 
dv Barro just below. 

mas ovv pot Soxet] ‘What 


course then shall I take?’ K. 


140 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 61—63. 


U ’ ’ pe. Ka e 20): / Py 06 tees | 
MpoTepov ToT avTOs odTOS® EOnKe vouov SieNOOvT’ ea 
éxeivo iévat TO pépos THS KaTHYyoplas on, bs Kal pe- 

‘~ > a / / / \ U ‘ 
yarn av Brarrot yevosevos KUpLos THY TOAW. TO 


\ > a a BA > / > / / 
eV Ov TOls TMV GANDY EvAYTLOV ELaEVNVOXEVAaL VOMOV 
> a al 
Sewvov pév, GAN’ Addov Seitar Katnydpov' Td Sé TO 
> a / / a 
vp éavtod' mpoTepoy KEeiméev@ vouw Tavavtia Oetvat, 
n_? Lal / fa) a 
ToUT On Toles KaTHYOpoY aUTOV avToD yeyernoOat. 
n> a 
iv ovv TovT eidnTe yuyvopevoy, avayvwceTat TOV 
ee 3 \ 2. 
vomov viv avTov Ov ovTos éOnKkev’ eyo 5é cLwTjao- 


par. Déye. 


NOMOS. 
[Tipoxparns eitrev, ordao AOnvaiwv Kat cicay- 
yedlav é€x THs Boudns 7) vov eiow ev TA Seopwrnpip 


© ovros om. Z Bekk. cum = et pr. YT. 
f 70 8 avrod Z Bens. cum 2. 


§ 62. 70 per ovv...xaryydpou] 
‘ Now to have introduced a law 
contrary to the laws of (passed 
by) other men, is a great of- 
fence, yet it requires another 
party for accuser.’ K. nearly. 

avaryvucerat] § 12 n. 

§ 63. Kar’ eicayyeNlay] The 
commonly received meaning of 
this term is ‘an impeachment 
before the senate or the assem- 
bly of the people for all ex- 
traordinary crimes committed 
against the state, and for which 
there was no special law pro- 
vided.’ But it is not easy to 
reconcile this very general lan- 
guage concerning the dypadga 
Snudcia détknuara (Pollux vit. 
51) with the véuos eloayyeATeKds 
of the text, of Pollux l.c. and 
of the Lexicon Rhetoricum Can- 
tabrigiense s.v. eloayyedla, a 
law which is described as limit- 
ing the term to certain speci- 
fied offences or at least classes 


of offences. Our knowledge of 
the recorded cases of elcayyedla 
has been greatly increased of 
late by the discovery of the pa- 
pyri of Hyperides; and the sub- 
ject has been exhaustively dis- 
cussed by Dr Herman Hager in 
the Journal of Philology, tv. pp. 
74112. The classes as defined 
by the law may be grouped as 
follows: (1) An Hisangelia xara- 
Adoews Tod Shuov, (2) rpodocias, 
(3) for giving bad advice to the 
people [only against a p7jrwp 
or professed public man, not 
against an idudrns], (4) édv tis 
ddcxy wept Ta év Tots vewplous, ap- 
parently a special form of mpo- 
docla designed to hedge in with 
additional safeguards the all- 
important maritime defences of 
Athens. To these Dr Hager 
adds (5) Kisangelia for offences 
against the commercial laws, of 
which last sort the following 
examples are adduced, (i.) A 


P. 720.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


141 


\ e / 
TO AowTov KaTaTeOdo1, Kal ur) TapadoOH 7 KaTa- 
a n / ¢ \ a / 
yvoots avTav Tois Oecpobérais V7r0 ToD ypappatéws 
n \ \ 
Tov KATA TpuTavelay KATA TOV EicayyENTLKOV VOMO?, 
8 80 6 g > / \ v4 5 > \ 8 , 
edoxGat® eiodyew Tous évdexa eis TO SiKaoTHpLov 


& add, Tots Oecpobéras Z Bens. cum libris. 


man was punished capitally eic- 
ayyerGels év TH Sjuw for raising 
a second mortgage upon the 
same property (émidedaveropévos, 
Demosth. c. Phorm. p. 922 § 50): 
(ii.) The 22nd Oration of Lysias, 
Kara Tov otToTwAGr, is an His- 
angelia against ‘forestallers 
and regraters’ who had bought 
up more than 50 ¢dopyol at one 
time, exemplifying, it may be 
added, all the fallacies which 
prevailed until very recently on 
the subject of the corn trade. 
Several of the cases on record 
do not at first sight come under 
any one of the above heads: 
and Dr Hager’s conclusion is 
‘that eloayyeAla was applied to 
crimes enumerated in the vduos 
eloayyeArixds, but also to all 
other crimes which’ by a legal 
fiction could be brought under 
that law (l.c. p. 78). When we 
consider the extreme elasticity 
of the terms xardAvats Tod Siyou 
and mpodosia at Athens, it is 
clear that prosecutors need ne- 
ver have been at a loss. 

The traditional statement 
adopted from the grammarians 
by most modern writers, that 
the prosecutor in a case of eic- 
ayyeAla was exempt from pe- 
nalty if he failed to obtain a 
fifth part of the votes, requires 
some modification. Cases oc- 
cur (e.g. de Cor. p. 310 § 250) 
in which eisayyeNia is mentioned 
in connexion with 7d pépos ra 
Yjpwv: and it seems probable 
that at least between Ol. 107 


and 110, 3 (B.c, 352—338) the 
impunity of the prosecutor was 
abolished. It is even doubt- 
ful whether it was ever revived: 
the speech of Hyperides in de- 
fence of Euxenippus implies, 
without stating, that it did not 
then exist (about 330). Hager, 


“Le. p. 112. 


Two other kinds of Eisange- 
lia are noticed in the ancient 
authorities and in Dict. Antiq. 
s.v.: the eloayyeda Kaxwoews 
and the elcayyeNa dtacrynrwr. 
These, however, were of less 
importance and our informa- 
tion about them is somewhat 
meagre, 

drdco...elolv...7...kararedGor] 
On this change of construction 
ef. § 39 n. 

Tov ‘ypaumaréws|] The ypap- 
pareds KaT& mpuTavelay Was one 
of the three ypayuuareis who 
were real state-officers and not 
mere clerks. He always be- 
longed to a different prytany 
from that which was in power. 
Dict. Antiq. s.v. 

5656x0a] § 20m. The words 
Tois Oecuo0érars (see various 
readings) cannot have formed 
part of the original laws even if 
they were really written by the 
‘law-concocter’ (Gesetzfabrik- 
ant). The explanation of G.H. 
Schaefer, followed in Kennedy’s 
and Benseler’s versions, ‘the 
Eleven shall bring them into 
court before the Thesmothetae,’ 
is neither good Greek nor con- 
sistent with what we know of 


142 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 63—65. 


/ 2h ¢ lal > > 2 

TpidKxovO” rwepav ad Hs av taparaBoow, édv pur} 
/ Uy a Ae 3g a 

Tt Onwooia Kodvy, Edy Sé un, OTav TpOTov oldv T 7. 
a hee 

katnyopetv 8 “A@nvalav tov Bovrcpuevoy ois eEertwv. 

2% ~ GON 5 Ul ¢ a 

éav © ad, TYLaTw 7 HrLala Tepl adTod 6 TL dv SoKH 

” 5 6 . Ke +9 Ate 2\ b) E) / 

afvos eivar Tabeiv 7) aotica. éav § apyupiov 


tal , 4 BY / a 
TiyunOH, SedécOw Ews' av extion 6 Te av adTod KaTa- 721 


yvoc 07. | 


h éyrds trprdxov@’ Z Bekk. Bens. cum libris. 
i réws Z Bekk. Bens. re é DAkrs Te ws v. 


the office of the évdexa. The 
latter were, first and princi- 
pally, executive officers into 
whose custody those condemned 
before the Thesmothetae or other 
judges were committed for pun- 
ishment, usually capital. They 
had further, in some cases, an 
original jurisdiction (jyeuovla 
dixaornplov), presiding as judges 
over a trial. But that they 
should have acted as promoters 
of suits in other courts is con- 
trary to all ancient testimonies, 
and scarcely conceivable. Taylor 
thought that the reading should 
be rods Oecuobéras, a gloss upon 
Tovs évdexa by some one who did 
not know of the judicial func- 
tions of the Eleven: Dindorf 
more simply regards the words 
as accidentally repeated from 
two lines above. His excision 
of évrds‘is likewise a concession 
to classical usage, which may or 
may not have been observed by 
the compiler (cf. nuepav rpiav 
Androt. § 14 n.). 

éav un Te Snuoola Kwrvy] ‘if 
the state of public business does 
not prevent it’ K. 

Tov Bovddpevoy ols ekeorw] 
‘any Athenian who pleases, not 
being disqualified’ by atimia, 
nonage, &c. 


mwadeiv * dmortca] These 
words are often joined to express 
‘fines or any other penalties,’ 
cf. Plato, Apol. 36 B ri déos 
elul mradeiv 4 amorioa, & Te wabuv 
év T® Bly ox novxlav jyov ; be- 
low, § 105. 

dpyuplouv Tyun97] Impersonal, 
with the dative to be supplied: 
as in §39 el ri... mpooreriunra. 
§$ 103, 105. 

&ws] The various readings 
here show that the copyists felt 
the difficulty of réws standing 
for the proper relative form éws. 
The question as to the admissi- 
bility of this sense of réws in 
Attic Greek is discussed by 
Buttmann Ind. Mid. s.v. réws, 
where all the passages from the 
Orators are collected, and by 
Shilleto on F. L. p. 446 § 374. 
The latter in his second and 
subsequent editions follows the 
authority of Dindorf against the 
MSS., and writes éws: but he 
mentions with some approba- 
tion Buttmann’s conjecture, 
that perhaps in all these cases 
we ought to read réws, ws. It 
is easier to believe that this re- 
dundant phrase belonged to le- 
gal language than to the literary 
style of Demosth. 


64 


65 


P. 721.) KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 143 


"Axovete, © avdpes Sixactal; Aéye avTois avToO 
TOUTO TaNLv. 


NOMOSX. 

[PEdv & apyvpiov tind7, SedécOw ews adv éxtion.| 

Ilémavoo. éoTw ody OTas av évavTidTEepa TIS 
dv0 Gein Tod SedécOat, Ews Av ExTicwot, TOs adovTas, 
Kal Tod KaOioTavat Tovs av’TOVS ToOUTOUS éyyuNTas, 
ada pn Seiv; TadtTa Toivuy Katnyopet Tiwoxparns 
Tipoxparovs, ov Avodwpos, ovd’ adrXos tyov ovdels 
TocovTwy dvT@V TO TANOOS. Kaitou Tivos av dyiv 
amocyécOat Soxet Ajppatos 7 Ti Tovey av oKYATAL 
Képdous éveca, baTis évavTia avTos avT@ vowoberetv 
n&Eiwoev, ovdée Tois AAXOIS TOV Vou“ov édyToV; enol 
pev yap évex’ avatdeias 6 TowodTos SoKel Trav av 
éToimws Epyov Towjoat. doTrep Tolvuv, @ avopes 
’"AOnvaiot, TOV Tepl TAAXA KaKOUVpywY TovSs OpoXo- 
youvras avev Kpicews KoAafewv of vomot KeXEVOUCL, 
otw Sixaov Kal TovTov*, éredy Tods vopous KaKoUp- 
yov eiAntrat, pn Sovtas Adyov pnd €OcdAncavtas 
axovoa katanpicacbar’ wpordynke yap [Oatépw'] 
TO TpoTép@ vou évaytiov Tovde TiWEls™ advKety. 
k rodrov Z Bens. cum libris. ' @drepov sine uncis Z Bekk. Bens. 

™ [r@ Tels] Bens. évavriov om. Z. 


§ 64. rod xaOiordva] The was provided for by the repeal 


change of subjects is note- 
worthy: ‘that these same per- 
sons (rods avrov’s to’rovs=Tovs 
adévras) should put in bail, and 
that one should not imprison 
them’ (instead of dedéoAar, that 
they should not be imprisoned), 

§ 65. klwoer] ‘thought pro- 
per,’ like @ero detv Androt. § 32 
n. 


Tois a&Aots] SC. évavria vouo- 


Oeretvy. As we have seen, this 


(Avew) beforehand of any laws 
which would be at variance with 
new legislation. §§ 18, 32, 33. 

évex’ dvatdeias| ‘so far as im- 
pudence goes,’ Lat. quod attinet 
ad, cf. Lept. p. 461 § 14 otdé yap 
el wdvu xpnorés éo6’, ws éuod vy’ 
évexa €oTw, BedrTiwy éorl THs Woe 
News 7d HOos: ‘as I am willing 
to admit that he is,’ esto, per 
me licet. 

Oarépw] The MSS. vary be- 


66 


67 


1a - KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 66—68. 


a \ / \ \ U ; v , 

Ori wev Toivuyv Kal Tapa TovToOUs TOUS VoMoUS Kal 
Tapa Tovs Tpoetpnuévous, Kal prKpod Séw Tapa tav- 
Tas” eitrety Tods dvTas év TH TOdeEL, TEDELKE TOV Vdmo?, 

> a ¢ cn & f f > > a 
oiuar OnNov atracw vpiv eivat. Oavudlw S avrovd te 
ToTe Kal TOAMNHOEL NEyEeLY TEpl TOUT@Y. OTE yap OS 

> > / ” ‘ae / n ” / ir4 
ovK évavtios tof 6 vomos Tots Grows Setxvve &Eex, 

wf)? ¢ > > / > / > \ v7 A 2». 
ov? ws Ov atretpiay ididTHY avTOV bYTa TOUT Eafe 
Se 2a a i , \ Q a \ , \ 

UvalT av TeicaL’ TaAaL yap picOod Kal ypadev Kal 

, > / * \ \ 239 ‘3 a ?f 2 fr 
vomous etopépov Orta. Kal pv ovd éxeivd x eve- 

a 9 \ a An 
OTL AUTO, Adiknua ev Eivat TO TPAyua OMorOYioat, 
ovyyvopns Sé tuxeiv a€tobv" ov yap dkwv ovd vrép 
¢ a 
HTVXNKOT@OV OVO UTEP Guyyevav Kal advayKaiwv av- 


2 rap’ amravras Z Bekk. Bens. cum =. 


tween Oarépw and Odrepov. Ben- dexvdev] Androt. § 34 n. 
seler reads Oarepov ddixeiv, brack- Above, § 35. It may be ob- 


eting the intervening words: 
Dindorf’s correction is much 
less violent and gives the best 
sense. Of course, if @dreporaé:- 
xew, ‘to offend on one of two 
points,’ be right, the rest must 
come out; but, as it seems to 
me, there is no real dilemma. 

§§ 66, 67. The proofs (from 
§ 39 onward) that Timocrates’ 
law is contrary to the existing 
law, are summed up with two 
remarks, (1) He cannot plead 
imexperience, as though he were 
a private man: for he has long 
been known as a professional po- 
litician framing decrees for hire. 
(2) Neither can he confess and 
plead extenuating circumstances: 
his illegalities were committed 
for the benefit of most undeserv- 
ing persons, who had no claim on 
his compassion. 

§ 66. Oavudfw 8 adrod ri] A 
construction more common in 
Plato than in the Orators: see a 
note on Protag. 329 c. 


served, as against Cobet’s Pro- 
crustean rule, that here and in 
§ 68 decxvivac would leave a hi- 
atus. 

era] The old Attic form of 
the perf. pass. duo is found in 
Aesch. Prom. 998: oa: in one 
place of Demosthenes (de Cor. 
p. 314 § 263). The later Attic 
éwpauac is more frequent: 1. 
Steph. p. 1121 § 66, c. Conon. 
p-. 1262 § 16, cf. wrpoewparar ib. 
§ 19. 

§ 67. ovyyevur kal dvayKalwr) 
The same phrase occurs de Fals. 
Leg. p. 434 § 290=332: and 
dvaryxato is perhaps= ido, and 
to be distinguished from ovyye- 
veis, ‘verwandter oder irgend 
befreundeter Leute,’ Benseler: 
but there can be no objection to 
K.’s rendering, ‘relations and 
connexions.’ For elsewhere we 
have such expressions as 7d T7js 
ovyyevelas dvayxata, ‘the strong 
ties of kindred,’ 1. Steph. p. 1118 
§ 54: and Leochar. p, 1088 § 26 


722 


P, 722.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


145 


al ¢ \ 
TO TeOciKos haiverat TOV Vomov, GAN éExdv VIrép 
‘ al / ] tal 
peyara noiKnKoT@V vas, ovdév TpoTHnKOYT@Y AUTO, 
TAN eb cuyyevels VroAapBave dyot Tors puto Oovpé- 


VOUS aUTOD. 


¢ na 
Qs toivuy ovS érutndecov vopov vpiy ovdé cvp~ 
/ > ‘ a 
fpépovt elcevnvorxe, ToDT On Treipacopas vuvi SevKVU- 


euV. 


© oloua drayras Z Bekk. 


oo a oO AW vp -£ na ¢ a“ 8 7 \ 
OlLal aTTaVTAaAS AV UPMaAS opmorXoyna Qt O€lV TOV 


oloua 57 wavras Bens. 


P dv om. Z cum >. 


Thy avayKaordarny cuyyéveray et- 
xouev, SvTes dveiadot éxelvy. 
This last passage is a good illus- 
tration of the clannishness of 
ancient life: ‘second cousins’ 
are spoken of as ‘ very near re- 
lations.’ 

avr @...av7@...avrov] Shilleto’s 
rule (Preface to F. L.) to write 
avr@ whenever the pronoun re- 
fers either to the primary or 
secondary subject, would require 
‘the reflexive form throughout 
this passage. Benseler some- 
whatinconsistently writes avay- 
kalwyv atte but mpoonkdvrwv av- 
T®@ and rods ptoOoupévous avrov: 
there can be no possible dis- 
tinction here, and the reflexive 
would be best in all three cases. 

§§ 68—107. Proof that the 
law of Timocrates is bad in 
itsel{—improper and inexpedi- 
ent. This argument is first 
stated briefly in the next four 
sections, then worked out in de- 
tail. 

§§ 68—71. The requirements 
of a good law are that it should 
(1) be drawn simply and intelli- 
gibly, (2) should not prescribe 
impossibilities, (3) should allow 
no indulgence to wrong-doers. 
If it is a feature of a popular 
government that the laws should 
be lenient, that can only mean 
that they should be lenient to 


WawD, 


those about to be tried, not to 
those who have been convicted, 
Judged by this test, T.’s law 
offends on every point, and is 
bad from beginning to end. 

§ 68. dexview] § 66n. It 
would take a good deal to per- 
suade one that Demosth. could 
have written NYNI decceNYNAI. 

oluat dmravras dv tpuas] See 
the various readings; ofuar is 
again as in § 53 the tacit cor- 
rection of Dindorf. I own that 
I prefer ofua: 5) rdvras to oluae 
amavras: the insertion of 5% has 
in its favour, as Benseler re- 
marks, the hiatus, the Scholiast, 
and the usage of Isocrates in 
similar passages, e. 8 Antid. 
§ 79 ofwae 5} wdvras dv duodoy7- 
oa. The Zurich editors in 
striking out dv have carried de- 
ference to = much too far: it is 
clear that the transcribers of 
this and some other MSS. omit- 
ted dy as unnecessary, because 
they hastily concluded that 
Omodoyjoa went with dei. Of 
course the real construction is 
deity yeypdp~0a: ‘I think, then 
(57), that you will admit that a 
law ought to be drawn’ &e. 
Madvig Advers. Crit. 1. 174 n. 
reads duodoynoew, accepting the 
omission of dv. But why not 
let well alone? 


10 


69 


7° 


146 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 68—71. 


6p0as eyovta voywov Kal cuvoice péddovTA TH 
mANnOEL TPOTOV pev ATABS Kal Tact yvwopinws ye- 
ypabbat, Kal pr) TO pev elvar TavTl Trept avTod vop-l- 
few, TO O€ TavTi. Eres elvar Suvatas Tas Tpakess, 
ds Sel yiyver Oar Sua TOD vopou’ ei yap av Kad@s pe 
éyot, pn) Suvatov Sé Te Hpdfor, evyns, ov vowov Sva- 
mpatToit av épyov. mpos dé TovTos pndevi THY 
adixovvtov gaiverOat pndepiay Siovta pactevny. 
ei yap Snpotixoy Tus UTrelAnhe TO Mpaous eivat ToVS 
pomous, Tit TovTos mpoceEeTaleTo, KavTrep opOws 
BovAntat cKoTretv, evpnoet Tots KplvecOas pédXdovowr, 
ov Tots é&eAnreypévors’ ev ev yap Tols ddnAov et 
Tis oT adixws StaBeBAnpEvOS, Tois Sé ovdEe AOYOS 
NelrreTas TO pn OU Tovnpois Elvalt, TOUTwY TolVUY OV 
SucEeAHjAVO eyo vov ovd oTLodY OvTOS éy@v 6 VOMOS 
davncetat, tavavtia 8 é&ns mavta. moddayobev 


pev ovv av Tis exot TOVTO SidacKe, wddLoTa Sé TOV 723 


¢ / 
vopmov avtov ov TéVerKe SieEiov. 


maou yvwpluws] Editions be- 
fore Bekker read with most MSS. 
macw suolws yvwpiuws. Here 
the authority of = has been 
rightly followed in rejecting 
an interpolation. Cf. Androt. 
§ 13 n. 

kal un 7@ pev elva] ‘it should 
be impossible for one man to 
put this construction upon it, 
and another that.’ K. 

duampdrroir’ av épyor] ‘it would 
be trying to do the work.’ d:a- 
mparrec0a. is a favourite word 
with Demosthenes: the active 
seems unknown to Attic prose. 

§ 69. paordyynv] ‘indulgence, 
alleviation.’ So de Cor. p. 301 
§ 219 of the shifty tactics of the 
orators vré\eure yap abra&v Exa- 
oTos dua pev paocTwrny, dua Oo’, et 


A \ > \ \ 
€OTL Yap OV TO MEV 


Tt yévor’, avadopdv: ‘tried to 
leave himself some way of light- 
ening his labours and some 
resource in difficulties.’ 

Onporikéy] §§ 34, 59. 

tlot tovros mpocekeragérw| 
‘let him further inquire to 
whom’ the laws are to be leni- 
ent: or ‘in whose case,’ ‘bei 
wem’ Benseler; tives ovrox ols 
mpao elaty, G. H. Schaefer. 

§ 70. ravavria & étfs wdvta]} 
‘the opposite in every particu- 
lar.’ é&4s, ‘in order,’ refers to 
the detailed proofs that not one 
of the qualities of a good law 
will be found in it. 

moh\\ax60ev]=o\Aax7, from 
many points of view, and so in 


many ways, ‘auf vielfacher 
Art.’ 


71 


P. 723.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 147 


avTOD KaNas KElpmevoY, TO SE juapTHpévov, GAN OXosS 

é& dpyns, amo THS TPOTNS TUAAABAS EXPL THS TEAEv- 
/ > , ¢ val n \ > ’ a \ \ 

taias, éb vuiv Keitat. AaBé & avtots THY ypadny 

avTny, Kal péxypt Tod TpwTOV pépous avayvod Tov 

yowov' pacta yap oUTws éyd Te didakw Kal vpeis 

/ > eA / 
pabnoec® & réyo. 


NOMOX. 


PEt ths Tavdiovides mpaétns mputavelas do- 
Sexatn’, Tov mpoédpav éerevryndicey “AptotoKAys 
Muppuwvotctos, Tywoxparns etme, xal ef Tie TOV odet- 


4 Swoexdryn om. Bens. 


éd vuiv keira] ‘itis directed 
against you, to your disadvan- 
tage;’ as in Aristocr. p. 665 
§ 137: a rather rare usage. 
Joined to a dative of the per- 
son éml means mostly ‘in the 
power of,’ as é¢’ vuiv § 25, some- 
times ‘applying to,’ as éml maou 
Tov avrov § 18; otherwise ‘ with 
a view to,’ as éml xaxg, or ‘on 


condition of’ anything, as émi 


roiTw, é¢ @. Cf. Jelf, Synt. 

634. 

§ 71. AaBe & adrots rv ypa- 
gnv] Foraitrots see§ 27n. rhv 
ypaphy is simply ‘the docu- 
ment’ (handing it)=7dv vdpor: 
not as K. ‘ the indictment.’ 

mpwrns mputavelas Swiexdry] 
In §§ 27, 39 mpdrys, évdexdry 
(Swoexdry) rijs rpuravelas: where 
see the notes. 

T&v mpoédpwr ... Muppivovtcros] 
This clause is added here: the 
rest of the ‘law’ is copied ex- 
actly from § 39. As the deme 
Muppwods was of the presiding 
tribe Pandionis, and the proedri 
belonged to the nine non-pre- 
siding tribes (§ 21n.), Meier in- 
geniously conjectured that we 


ought to read ék Muppwodrrns, 
Muppivotrra being a deme of 
the tribe Aegeis. (It is worth no- 
ticing that Muppwodrra, equally 
with Muppivois, would naturally 
form Muppivotc.os as its demotic 
name: hence for the sake of 
distinction éx Muppwotrrns was 
used, as ék Kepauéwv, of Kepa- 
pets or Kepayeckds, to prevent 
confusion with xepayel’s a pot- 
ter.) Dindorf approves Meier’s 
conjecture ; but it will not save 
the credit of the document: the 
mention either of Prytanes or 
Proedri in a court of Nomothe- 
tae is fatal to its genuineness, 
as has been seen on §§ 27, 33. 

Supposing, however, that he 
was right in giving the form of 
a Psephisma in the Ecclesia, 
the law-compiler has at least 
hit upon the correct form for the 
date of this speech. Examples 
both of the earlier and later 
model are given by Schoemann, 
Antiq. p. 386: and the earliest 
inscription in Boeckh, in which 
the latter is followed, is of B.c. 
355. 


10—2 


72 


i 


148 


# KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 71—73. 


yt ge / / © eae A 
Advtov TH Snmooi@ TpooteTiuyntal KaTa vopmov 4 
\ / an oN \ \ al 5. 
Kata Widiopa Secuod 7) TO NovTdv TpoaTiypnON, eivat 
IT@ ) GAN UIrép Exeivou éyyunTas KaTacTHoat.| 
avT@ ) AAA UTEP v éyyuntas Hoar. 


> / > /¢ \ a. 3 / Yr 
Eqioyes* avtixa yap ka? éxaotov avayvocet’. 


TouTl mavTov, © avdpes Sikactal, TOV yeypaypéevov 


? A / / > t 
év TO Vow ayeddv é€ott SewvdTaTov. 


5 \ 29\ 
oluat Yap ouode 


n vA ‘ 
éva* avOpwtrov' adXov TOApHaaL, Vomov ELapépovTa ETT 


® qvayveon Z cum libris praeter Q, dvayvwob7n Bens. 


8 ovdéva Z, odd’ év Bens. 


§§ 72—76. Mischievous ef- 
fects of a law which reopens 
cases already decided, and so 
introduces uncertainty into the 
working of the judicial system. 
What should we think of a man 
who, after suffering the defend- 
ant’s law to be confirmed, should 
propose a decree, not only that 
no one should be bailed out in 
future, but that those who had 
put in bail according to that law 
should be deprived of the benefit 
of their bail? Now in reality 
retrospective remission of punish- 
ment is just as bad as retrospect- 
ive penal legislation (72—74). 
What is the distinctive princi- 
ple that makes constitutional 
government differ from oli- 
garchy ? The supremacy of law, 
not of individual wills. But 
the defendant, legislating while 
our state is still democratic, gives 
his own will a force above the 
verdicts of juries (75, 76). 

§ 72. dvayvdice.] We should 
rather expect dvayvwcera: the 
speaker as a rule addresses the 
clerk only with the formal order 


to ‘read’ or ‘stop reading,’ and . 


any explanatory remarks are 
usually made to the court. As 
a matter of fact this law is read 
no further by the clerk, but is 
quoted clause by clause and 


t gvOpwrwv Bekk. 


analysed by the orator himself. 
Schaefer’s explanation, that the 
orator carried away by the cur- 
rent of his ideas ( fervore dicendi 
abreptus) forgets himself, is ge- 
nerally accepted. It does not 
satisfy Benseler,who writes from 
his own conjecture dvayrwob7: a 
use of the subjunctive which I 
confess myself unable to explain. 

oluat yap ovdé va dvOpwirov 
ddd\ov] There is considerable 
variety of reading here, Din- 
dorf alone writes on principle 
otwat for olouar (§§ 53, 68): Bek- 
ker’s dv@pwrwy rests on a single 
MS. ‘correctus F.’ For ov- 
déva of the best MSS. most 
recent editors introduce the 
more emphatic form: but Ben- 
seler as the author of a treatise 
on hiatus writes 00d &’ dvOpw- 
mov. Once for all, it may be as 
well to state that Demosth. does 
not avoid hiatus with the pe- 
dantic care of an Isocrates: as 
Prof. Jebb puts it, ‘he knew 
how to hit the mean’ (Att. Or. 
11.67). The very rare excep- 
tions in Isocrates are enume- 
rated in Sandys’ note on Paneg. 
§ 143. 

I notice that five MSS. (not 
=) read undéva, in order to re- 
mark that after verbs of think- 
ing the negative is almost inva- 


73 


x SS age Vf A / 
yo \* OF THE | 


UNIVERSI 

KATA TIMOKPATOT2.\. @, _ 149° 

n n \ / > “ \ \ d LIFORMS 
TO ypnoOat Tovs TONTAS AUTO, TAS KATA TOUS = 


pov Kuplovs vouous Kpioes yeyevnuévas erruyetiphoat 
Aveev. 






P. 724:.| 


tovTo Tolvuy ovtocl Timoxpatns avaides Kat 
309 > / / / / 
ovd arrokpuyrdpevos memoinke, yparyas Stappydny 
n > / A / 
“al el Tut TOV dpEetovT@V TO Snuociw TpocTeTi- 
\ / x \ / PS a xX \ 
LNTAl KATA Vomov  KaTAa WHhdiopa Secpuod 7 TO NoL- 
\ a2) \ \ n / 7 
mov tmpootynon. epi wev O17) TOV weAXOVTOY Et TL 
, ‘A eo] 3 
Sixasov éresoev Vas, ovK av HOiker* Tept 8 av diKa- 
oTHpLov éyvoke Kal Tédos ExxnKe, THS ov Sewa Trove? 


724, 


riably of. This pointis touched 
upon in my note on Plat, Pro- 
tag. 317 4, where however, as 
in most grammars, it is not put 
strongly enough (Madvig, Synt. 
§ 205, Jelf, Synt. § 745). 

To\ujoa| ‘ever dared,’ rather 
than as K. ‘ would dare,’ which 
would require dv. 

ovd droxpuduevos] ‘not even 
disguising it: without so much 
as an attempt at concealment.’ 
dmoxptmrrecOa is far more com- 
mon than the active forms: in 
mu. Aphob. p. 836 § 3 we find 
ovx drokéxpurra in the transi- 
tive sense. 

§ 73. é@rewev...ndiker] In 
these conditional sentences, the 
aor. ind. refers to past time, 
the imperf. to present: ‘if he 
had persuaded you to a just 
course with respect to future 
cases, he would not (now) be in 
the wrong.’ 

kal tédos éoxnxe] The full 
construction here would be zrepi 
TovTw & (acc.) SecacTypiov éyvw- 
ke kal @ (nom.) réXos éoxnke. 
This is not, therefore, simply 
an instance of the rather rare 
attraction of the nominative: 
but after the usual attraction of 
the acc. another relative has to 
be supplied in the nom. case. 
Examples of the attracted no- 


minative are discussed in Jelf, 
Synt. § 822, obs. 4, and in 
Cope on Arist. Rhet.1. 5 § 11 da 
TO pndev Exew wy Td yipas Aw- 
Barat. Thus Herod. 1. 78 ovdév 
Kw elddres Trav Hv wept Ddpdis Te 
kat a’rov Kpoioov. Instances of 
attraction, if at all exceptional, 
require careful discrimination 
in order to classify them aright. 
Each of the above-quoted au- 
thorities gives corrected ex- 
planations of doubtful or mis- 
understood passages: neither 
has entirely escaped error him- 
self. Jelf cites as an attracted 
nominative Xen. Hell. 1.2 § 1 
Te So GdAw éree G Hv “ONvmmids: 
but he omits the following 
words, 7 mpooredeioa svvwpis 
évixa Evaydpov ’Hielov. It is 
clear that ’Odvumias is not 
Olympic year or Olympiad, but 
Olympic games: and the mean- 
ing is, ‘‘ the new year, in which 
was the 93rd Olympic contest, 
wherein the ‘additional’ or 
‘extra’ chariot of Evagoras was 
victorious:” the sense of mpoc- 
teetoa here is not given by 
the lexicons. Cope also in- 
stances Plat. Protag. 3340 éy 
Tovros ols wédAer ZdecOu as if 
éecPac were passive, ‘things 
which are going to be eaten:’ 
what is really noticeable is the 


74 


150 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 73—75. 


v > , a 7 
vouov elapepwv dv od TadTta AvOnceTAL; wWoTrEp av 


ByA U 
el Tis €acas KUplov TOY TovUToU yevécOaL vomov 


/ , ¢ 
ypavretey Erepov toiovde “Kal el tives, OPANKOTES 
/ \ a ? a 
xXpnKaTa Kal Seamov TpocTEeTLUNmevov avTots, éyyun- 
; , \ 
Tas KATETTHTAY KATA TOV VomoV, fn Elva THY SLEY- 


yunow avtois, unde Td DNourov é&eyyudy pndéva.” 


b ] ’ vv Qn , x b] \ ¢ fio > 
adr ovtTe TavTa Toinceeyv Ay ovbels VyLaivar, oipat, 


Ul b] > a , 7 a \ aoe > \ 
ov T €KélvVa VOY noiKeLs, XpPnV yap aUTOV, El TO 


transition from the plural to 
the singular, the subject of ué\- 
Ae being supplied from rofs 
adcbevodcw above. These pas- 
sages seem to me instructive 
enough to be worth putting in 
their true light, though at the 
cost of a slight digression. 

wprnkébres ... mpooreTiunuevov 
avrots} ‘having been adjudged 
debtors (Androt. § 347.) and 
had the further penalty of im- 
prisonment (in addition to pay- 
ing the debt, § 2 n.) pronounced 
against them.’ 

dueyyinow ... éEeyyvavy] The 
various derivatives from éyyin 
are discussed in Meier and 
Schoemann, Att. Process p. 
521: dteyyvnors, it is remarked, 
is much the same as é£eyytnots 
(§ 77). ‘Egeyyvay is ‘to bail 
out, release on bail:’ xarey- 
yuav ‘to hold to bail.’ For 
dueyyunow several MSS. read 
éyyinow, which G. H. Schaefer 
preferred but no editor has 
adopted ; indeed the simple 
form éyyl'no.s seems to occur 
only in the sense of ‘betrothal,’ 
for which see Schoemann, An- 
tig. p. 8356, Androt. § 53 n. 

§ 74. dyatywy] Here ‘sane’ 
opposed to pauvduevos. More 
usually=ed gpovdv, of good 
sense or right judgment, as in 
Fals. Leg. p. 434 § 289=331 


ovdé poBet ue Pidiwos, av ra 
Tap tuovvy.atvy. Inthe Speech 
on the Chersonese p. 98 § 36 
the orator plays on the two 
senses of physical and mental 
health: vudv oto: wevovrwv, oxo- 
Anv aydvTwv, vyrawdrvTwy (el 37 
Tovs Ta ToLadTa TovodyTas Vy.ai- 
vew dynoaev). Unless I am mis- 
taken vyaivew is not found, like 
vyijs, in a moral sense to ex- 
press ‘honesty’ or, more often, 
‘ dishonesty ’ (ovdév, under vytés). 

av...av7ov] Both pronouns of 
course refer to Timocrates: an 
unusually abrupt change from 
the direct to the oblique. ‘He 
ought, if he thought the step 
a just one, to have passed his 
law in reference to the future: 
not to have mixed up future 
offences with the past, certain 
with uncertain, and then pre- 
scribe the same judgment for 
all.’ The fallacy of this argu- 
ment has already been pointed 
out on §§ 56—58. Modern legis- 
lation, when it has once con- 
cluded that a given penalty is 
too severe, feels the equity of 
mitigating sentences that are 
running their course : Demosth. 
argues, as though any such miti- 
gation were as bad asthe rescind- 
ing of contracts, and created 
the same sense of insecurity. 
Above, § 44n. 


p.724] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 151 


n lal / 
mpayy évopuste Sixatov, emt Tots VaTEepov yevnoopévols 
A . 7s 4 \ 
Ocivar Tov vomov, Kal pn cUVEVEyKOVTA Eis TAUTO Ta 
péAXovTa Tols TapeAnrAvOdct Kai Ta gw SHra Tos 
a lal U t PAU, § 
havepois aducnpacw eit ért mace yparrat THY avTHY 
n n lod ] 
yvounv. mds yap ov Sewov tdév avtav n&vwxévar 
a \ / 
dixalwv tors éEeAnAeypévous adiKodvTas THY TOD 
/ 
mpotepov Kal Tovs nd ei Kploews aEvov épyacovral 
TL ONXOUS 5 
ro / 
75 Kal poy xaxeidev idor tis av ds Sewwodv werroinke 
\ a \ a Ud \ / > 
TO Ocivat Tepl THY TapeAnAVOOTwY TOY VOLoP, EL Ao- 
/ / 
yloatto Tap avT@ Ti ToT éoTlv @ vom“os Oduyapyias 
A 
Siadhéper, kal ti 6 To oi pév Vd vowwv é0édovTes 
” f) / \ \y / c Ss 
dpyecbar cadppoves Kai xpnotol” vouifovtar, ot 


¥ moNtrac add Z Bens. [otra] Bekk. 


dixalwy] ‘rights,’ rather than 
as K. ‘ measure of justice.’ The 
orator would not argue that 
they ought to have less than 
justice. But he introduces a 
further paralogism in order to 
magnify the guilt of Timocra- 
tes. On the one side he sets 
‘those who have been previously 
convicted of crimes against the 
state,’ on the other, ‘persons of 
whom it is not yet known whe- 
ther they will ever do anything 
worthy of trial,’ when they are, 
ex hypothest, in process of being 
tried, though not yet convicted. 
Demosth. has really a good case 
in this speech, and he does not 
improve it by the unfair points 
he tries to make. 

§ 75. ws dewdv memolnxe] 
‘what a monstrous thing he 
has done in giving his (rdv) law 
a retrospective action.’ 

vomos ddvyapxlas Suadéper] Je- 
rome Wolf, followed by Taylor, 
wanted to read dfuos instead of 
vouos, correctly no doubt as re- 


gards the sense, but with a 
strange want of perception of 
Demosthenes’ mode of ap- 
proaching ajury. Inthis andthe 
next section, édvyapxla is three 
times opposed to vdjos or vouot, 
once to év Snuoxparoupévy TH 
moder. The speaker is indi- 
rectly, but in a way likely to 
catch the favour of an Athenian 
audience, begging the question 
that constitutional government 
is not to be had outside a de- 
mocracy. In Livy 1.1 the note 
of the republic, as distinct from 
the regal period, is defined as 
‘imperia legum potentiora quam 
hominum:’ Demosth. further 
narrows the empire of law to a 
democratic republic. 

cwppoves kal xpnorol] The 
two words go to make up the 
notion of ‘law-abiding:’ com- 
pare a note on § 53, where xp7- 
orol and dvavdpor were similarly 
opposed. Benseler’s ‘ verstin- 
dige brave Leute,’ though spi- 
rited, is not very exact, 


152 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [8§ 76, 77. 


76 UTo TAY ddvyapyLav avavdpot Kai SodroL. evpos yap 


x ¢ 3 A a / vA al \ > 
av os adnOds TovTO TpoYELpOTATOY, OTL TOV MEV EV 
a / a 
tais oduyapyiats Exacros Kal Ta TeTpaypEeva Oat 
\ \ a s A XN 2) * 34 } n / 
Kat Tept TOY MEArXCYTOV A Av avT@ doKh Tpootagkat 


\ 


/ / > e \ / \ a 'f \ 

KUpLos éoTLV, of SE vOmoL TrEepl TOY hEeNNOVT@V A YPN) 
a a / 

yiyvecOat dpafovet, weTa Tov Teicat TeOerTEs ws 


cuvolaovet Tois ypwpmévors. 


Tcpoxparns toivuy év 


Snuwoxpatoupévy TH TWOAEL VoMOOETaY THY Ex THS OAL- 
mwoxparoupévy TH ye my Kk TH 

> > ¢ n / / 
yapxlas adikiav eis Tov avTOD vomov peTNVEYKE, Kal 


§ 76. &xacros...kupis éorww] 
‘every man has the right ;’ with 
a tacit reference to the claims 
of ‘might.’ Kennedy’s note here 
shows a clear perception of the 
speaker’s drift: —‘ That is, there 
is no lawto preventhim. What 
the orator says is not to be un- 
derstood (as Schaefer thinks) of 
the rulers only. Every man 
has the right, if he can only en- 
force it. By putting it in this 
way the orator makes the con- 
trast between oligarchy and de- 
mocracy the more striking. In 
the former there is no law, and 
therefore no security either for 
the past or the future.’ 

Athens was no doubt the best 
governed state in Greece, and 
the most on its guard against 
oligarchical insolence: yet the 
examples of Alcibiades, Midias, 
and Conon (in Demosth. Or. 54) 
show the spirit of wild self- 
assertion which was ever ready 
to break out. The conduct of 
the French nobility, towards 
their inferiors and among them- 
selves, till quelled by the ‘Grands 
Jours’ in the early part of Louis 
XIV.’s reign, affords a more 
modern instance. The charac- 
ters of Rodrigo and the Innomi- 
nato, in Manzoni’s Promessi 
Sposi, show that even the foreign 


despotism of Spain failed to 
check the ‘prepotenza’ of the 
Lombard nobles in the seven- 
teenth century. The upper 
classes of England in the last 
century were perhaps equally 
insensible to any public opinion 
but that of their own order 
(Trevelyan’s ‘Harly Life of Fox,’ 
passim): but they belonged to a 
more law-abiding race. 

peta TOU Tetoa] ‘ being enact- 
ed on condition of persuading 
the people that they will benefit 
those who live under them.’ 
It is easy to supply the object 
of metoar from Trois xpwpyévos: 
in a free country the legislators 
are identical with of xpdépyevor, 
and no law can be carried with- 
out persuading them: hence 
pera, ‘with,’ expresses the in- 
separable condition of all legis- 
lation. Kennedy’s ‘under the 
persuasion’ is rather misleading.- 

év Snuoxparoupévy TH moder] 
Not ‘in a democratical state,’ 
but ‘‘while the state is consti- 
tutionally governed,’ § 56 n. 

Thy €k THS Odhvyapxlas ddtklay] 
As the opposite of év Snwoxp. Ty 
move. this may mean (1) defi- 
nitely, ‘the injustice inherited 
from oligarchic times,’ or (2) 
generalising the article, ‘the ini- 
quity naturally resulting from 


P, 725.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOT®2. 


153 


Tept TOV TapednrAvOdTwY av’TOY KUpLwOTEpoY TOV 
Katayvovtay Sicactav nElwoe Tomcat. 

Kal ov rovro povov terolinkey bBpiotiKoy, dAXa 
Kab yéyparrat, ) TO ovToy éav TL TpooTipnOn 
Secwov, evar KaTacTHcavTs Tovs éyyunTas, 7 wnV 


éxticew, abetobar. 


/ fal , am, | > \ 
KQUToOl XPV avuTov, €b TO Oe- 


déc0ar Sewov nyeiro, wndevt mpootiuay Os av viv 
éyyuntas KabioTn Secpod vopoerhcat, yn Tpora- 
Bovra kateyvwxoras vas Tov Secpov pnd éxOpas 


oligarchies,’ ‘die Uebelstinde 
aus Oligarchien’ Benseler, or 
(3) by a common Greek idiom 
be equivalent to év rH ddryap- 
xia (G. H. Schaefer), The first 
of these seems best suited to 
the context. 

§§ 77, 78. A further element 
of uncertainty introduced by the 
defendant’s law, and a further 
proof of his insolence. Not 
only will causes already decided 
be thrown into confusion, but 
in future no one will know whe- 
ther the verdict of a jury may 
not be set aside by the mere vote 
of persons not on their oath. If 
you, the jury, think that effect 
ought to be given to your ver- 
dicts, you must refuse your 
sanction to this law. 

§ 77. yéyparra] This, the 
reading of the best MSS., is now 
_ universally accepted. The sense 
is of course passive, ‘a clause 
is inserted.’ The other reading 
yéypapevy is evidently a cor- 
rection in order to avoid the 
change of the subject. 

pnievl ... vomobernaac] The 
meaning is plain, but the order 
of these words more involved 
than is usual with Demosthe- 
nes: xp7yv...vouolernrar pundéve 
mpooTiyuav Secuov, ‘he ought to 


have carried a law to sentence 
no one to imprisonment as a 
further penalty,’ i.e. to abolish 
imprisonment in the case of 
those who put in bail. 

Hn mpodaBdrvTa] uy, according 
to a frequent usage of dAN od, 
kal o¥, d\Ad wn, Kal wy, Marks 
the divergence of two alterna- 
tives, and may be translated 
‘instead of.’ The past parti- 
ciple followed by an adverb 
(usually «fra, here ryvixaira) 
like Lat. twm demum, expresses 
a sharp contrast of time, ‘then, 
and not before.’ We may trans- 
late, then, ‘instead of waiting 
till you had passed the sentence 
of imprisonment, and till the 
person convicted had become 
irritated against you, and after- 
wards bailing out the accused.’ 
It is invidiously argued that 
Timocrates, whose real motive 
was simply to get his friends 
out of a scrape, had deliberately 
brought on his motion in a 
form calculated to annoy and 
humiliate the Athenian people 
by ostentatiously reversing their 


decrees, and to make as much 


mischief as possible by the un- 
gracious way in which relief 
is granted. 


78 


154 KATA TIMOKPATOTS.  [8§ 77, 78. 


\ ¢ a \ c / n an 
SvatebévTa Tpos Vas TOV NAWKOTA THVLKAVTA TroLELY 
/ b lA 
Thy é&eyyinow. vuvi 8, wotep évdetkvipevos OTL, 
x ches PS) a PS) dé a \ a" > / a 
cav vpiv Soxn Sedécbat Twa, avTos adjoe, TOUTOV 
\ / \ / > / 8 3 mo a 
TOV TpOTrOV TOV Vopov EionveyKev. Gp ovv Tw SoKeEl 
a / \ 
cupdépery TH TOAEL TOLOUTOS VvoOmos Os SiKacTHplov 
b) / 
yveoews avTos KupLm@Tepos EoTat Kal Tas VITO TOV 
lal > 
OMWOLOKOTOV YYOTELS TOLS avMpOTOLS TpoaTakeL ELV; 


> \ \ b) S 

€Y@ LEV OVK OLUal. 
as > lA 

TavT éyav apuotepa. 


fAwkbra] The question be- 
tween the forms 7Awxa and 
éddwka is better left to the 
MSS. rather than, as by Din- 
dorf, reduced to a uniform rule. 
In the present speech MSS. and 
editors give without variation 
gawka here and §§ 84, 105, 
éddwka §§ 112, 137: Dindorf 
alone -corrects the two latter 
passages. In some places the 
MSS. vary, or show correc- 
tions: e.g. Fals. Leg. p. 397 
§ 179=198. Veitch s.v. aX- 
cxouo. affords ample materials 
for judging of the general Attic 
usage. In Demosthenes, ac- 
cording to Bekker and the Zu- 
rich Editors, who follow the 
MSS., éd\wxa occurs more fre- 
quently in the proportion of 
about eighteen times to eight: 
in the other Orators the same 
form prevails exclusively. When 
to this is added the fact, that 
Thucydides and Plato write 
uniformly édAwkxa, it is irra- 
tional to argue that 7AwKa ‘be- 
longs to the stricter Atticism.’ 
Veitch well remarks that ‘we 
find it most frequently in those 
authors that are least shy of 
an Ionic or a common form,’ 
instancing Herodotus and Xeno- 
phon. The latter uses both 
forms indiscriminately in the 


Ul 
dpaivetat Toivuy 6 ToOUTOV VOMOS 
7 > ¢ a 
@orT elTEp VUOV EKdoT@ 


same work, the Cyropaedia, and 
thus contributesnothing towards 
the solution of the question. 

While on the subject of danXt- 
oxouac I may be allowed to ex- 
press my surprise that no notice 
has been taken of the singu- 
larity of the long a in Aristoph. 
Vesp. 355 ore Ndfos Aw. Other 
examples in verse show every- 
where a: and rather than be- 
lieve, on the strength of this 
one passage, that the vowel is 
really common, I think it much 
more probable that Aristophanes 
for once allowed himself to write 
édd\Xw, as it is now admitted he 
wrote xuvoxepdddw in Hq. 416. 

Thvixadra] hvika, wyvika; T- 
vixa are not simply ‘when’ and 
‘then’ of time in general, but 
strictly of the time of day only. 
In Plato rnvixdée is ‘so early,’ 
Protag. 310 B, Crito 43 a: and 
Tnvixadra here might very well 
be rendered by the familiar 
English ‘at that time of day,’ 
preserving the figurative expres- 
sion, 

§ 78. galverac — duddrepa] 
‘Both these consequences, it 
is plain, are involved in the 
defendant’s law.’ K. rightly. 
Cf. Androt. § 21 n. 

elrep vay éxdorw pédrer TL] 
‘If, as I assume to be the fact, 


P, 725.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 155 


perder TL THS moduTelas Kal Sety oleTar Kupiay civar 
\ e n t i 5 8 Xn > \ / 

THY AVTOD yYOuNV TEPL WY AY OMwpoKas WhhionTat, 

a \ 

AuvTéos Kal ovK éatéos* 6 TOLODTOS Vdmos KUpPLOS VUvL 


yevéo Oar. 


x add ovros Z Bens. cum 2. 


each one of you has some re- 
gard for the constitution.’ The 
force of elrep is well pointed 
out by R. W. 

§§ 79—101. Effects of the 
law of Timocrates on the fi- 
nances of Athens. It will allow 
the most absolute impunity to 
defaulters (§§ 7T9—90): in time 
of war it will render prompt 
military action, for which ready 
money is the first requisite, im- 
possible, and so endanger both 
the glory and the safety of the 
state (§§ 91—95): even in time 
of peace it will induce national 
bankruptcy (§§ 96—101). These 
three heads are again briefly 
summarized in § 102, (i) rots 
ddtxoder TH Kava Sldwow ddecav, 
(ii) rds brép THs mddews oTpa- 
Tuas Aupalverat, (iii) ryv duol- 
Know karadve. 

The frequent captiousness of 
the speaker’s arguments has 
been already noticed (§§ 56, 74): 
and several passages in these 
sections seem, at first sight, not 
merely uncandid but nonsens- 
ical. We can scarcely imagine 
the lowest of Old Bailey advo- 
cates or the most foolish of 
platform orators resorting to 
such transparent fallacies as 
that of § 85, that by putting up 
a succession of ‘men of straw’ 
the debtor might escape without 
either paying or going to prison: 
or that of § 88, that because 
the law of Timocrates has pro- 
vided no penalty for not offer- 
ing bail, therefore a man has 


only to omit doing so to es- 
cape scot-free. But Demosthenes 
knew his audience: and he is 
here approaching the Athe- 
nians on their weak side. He 
appeals not merely to their 
chronic hunger for fines and 
forfeitures, now at its height 
owing to the impoverished state 
of the exchequer (cf. Androt. 
§ 48 n.), but to their furious 
jealousy of being overreached, 
which was by no means incom- 
patible with the secret resolve 
of each man to defraud the 
state if he could (Androt. § 48, 
last note. Below, § 193). The 
mental attitude of modern Ita- 
lians towards the tax-gatherer 
has been defined by a close 
observer among their own coun- 
trymen, Mr Gallenga, as ‘ Only 
fools pay.’ The Athenian shared 
this feeling: and while he read 
his neighbour’s heart in his 
own, determined that the grati- 
fication of it should, as far as 
possible, be confined to himself. 
(On the low standard of honesty 
among the Greeks, see Ma- 
haffy’s Social Life in Greece, 
p. 122 ff. (ed. 3): on the un- 
scrupulousness of the Athenian 
Demos as to the ways and means 
of replenishing the treasury, 
p. 399 n., where a strong passage 
of Lysias, c. Nicom. § 22, is 
quoted). 

A comparison of the earlier 
with the later speeches will, I 
think, support the conclusion that 
Demosth, outgrew this tempta- 


156 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 79—82. 


b] 7 > /, > fal \ , v 
79 Ov toivy aréxpnoev avT@ Ta dSuKaoTnpia aKupa 
a a , b] > IQ A / tet ¢ 
TOMTAL TOV TPOTTLUNMATWV, ANN oOvdE a OixaLa wpl- 
a © > bed / \ / a 3 / 
CATO AUTOS €v TO VO" Kat TpoceTake Tos wWhANKO- 
AN fal ¢ lal A\ Pe , id 
ow, OVde TAVTA ATADS OVdSe AdodKwS havnoeTat Ye- 
\ 3 > if x / / ¢ la! b] lal 
ypages, GAN ws av pdaddiota Tis vuds eEaTraThoaL 
\ / / , \ 
kat tapaxpovoacGat Bovropevos. akerracbe yap 
ce / / 4 \ \ 5 
ws yéypadev. Tioxparns eimre, dnol, Kal ev TIE 
A > t n / / \ 
Tov ohetdovtav TO Snuooiw mpootetipyntat Kata 726 
/ x \ i Py a xX \ \ 
vomov 7) Kata Wndiopa decuov ) TO AoLTOY TpoaTt- 
A 3 > a x v ¢ \ b] / b] \ 
nOyn, eivat avT@® ) AddrAwW VUITEp ExEivou éyyuNTAaS 
KATATTHTAL, OVS av O OHMos YELpoTOVHEH, } nV eKTI- 


80 


oeL. 
, @ , 
yveoews of Svemrndynoer. 


tion to practise on the gullibility 
of an Athenian jury and try how 
much: they would swallow. The 
most glaring examples of un- 
fairness occur in these two 
speeches belonging to an early 
stage of his career. At thirty 
he had almost fully matured the 
powers which had been called 
into such precocious exercise in 
his actions against his guard- 
ians: at a later period, together 
with a mellower ripeness of in- 
tellect, we seem to discern a 
higher sense of self-respect, at 
least as regards the utterance 
of transparent fallacies. In the 
license of invective pushed to the 
extreme of bad taste, his great- 
est speeches, the Embassy and 
the Crown, are unfortunately 
the worst offenders. That he 
could have been here deceived 
by his own arguments is not 
to be thought of : like his enemy 
Midias, though in another way, 
he ‘indulges in youthful inso- 
lence’ (veavieverar, p. 520 § 18, 
p. 536 § 69). 


b tal foe \ n / \ n 
évOupeia? amo Tov Siuxactnplov Kal THS KaTa- 
éml tov Onuov, éKkrNéerrToV 


§§ 79—81. Timocrates pro- 
vides that the state debtor sen- 
tenced to imprisonment may put 
in such bail as the people shall 
approve: thereby ruinously un- 
dermining the jurisdiction of the 
courts. And as he nowhere di- 
rects the debtor to be imprisoned 
until he has put in his bail, it 
is clear that his only object was 
to ensure the escape of criminals 
condemned in due course of law. 

§ 79. ws dv...Bovdduevos] i.e. 
ws dv ypapo Tis...BovAduevos, ‘as 
one would draw them who wish- 
ed to deceive and defraud you 
as much as possible.’ 

el... mpooreTiunrat...7)... poo- 
TLuLNnOH] §§ 89 n., 93. 

§ 80. éxxd\érrwy] ‘stealing 
away the guilty party’—*‘ rescu- 
ing him by stealth ’—‘ and pre- 
venting his delivery to the Ele- 
ven.’ As R. W. remarks, it is 
almost impossible to express 
éxx\értwv by one word as ap- 
plied to both its objects, 7d.«y- 
Kora and rapddoouw. 


81 


82 


p.726.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 157 


fal \ al 
TOV HRdixnKOTa Kal THY Tapddoctw avToD THY Tots 
v4 5 / \ > \ 8 / \ > / - U 
&voexa. Tis yap apy7 Tapaddce Tov oprdvTa; TIS 
Tov é&vdexa Taparnw erat; KEAEVOVTOS MeV TOD VOMoVY 
, > n , , \ > \ > , 
TovTou év TO Snuw Kabiotavat TOvs éyyunTas, aduva- 
> 7 ? \ > / vA \ ‘ 
tov © ovtos avOnuepov éexkrAnoiav dma Kal SixacTn- 
/ iT) n S > / U 
pov yevécOat, ovdapmod O émitattovtos puNaTTEL 
; \ 

&ws” av KaTaoTNON TOUS éyyUNTas. 
nv dt 0 mpocypanyar capes aKvynce “tHv & apynv 
\ > U / v4 A / \ 
tov oprovta gurXaTTEWW ews av KaTAaTTHON TOUS 
> / ”? 4 > a / > POP). é / 
éyyuntas ;” motep ovyl Sixavov; ev oid OTL Tap- 
xX , > ? > / > \ an / 

Tes av dyncaite. ANA EVaYTiOV HY TLVL TOUTO VOL ; 


Kaltot Tl wor 


x > \ / \ \ r / > ey 9 
OvK, GANA “ovoY KATA TOUS VOmous. TL TOT OUY HV; 
OX x v ¢/ \ ¢/ ? 24 / 
ovdév Gv GAXo TIS EUpoL TAY OTL OVY OTTwS SHcovVEL 
/ e x ¢ a an ? / > 7 WwW / 
Slknv @V av UpEls KATAYVOTE ETKOTEL, ANN OTF@S [N). 
n / » a 
Kita mas yéypartar peta tadta; Kabioravar 


Y rod vouov om. Z Bens. cum . 
* vy. § 63. re ws XZ, re €ws Ar 8, Téws ws k. Ita § 81. 


dduvérov & bvros| For the 
obvious reason that every Athe- 


nian dicast must, as a fully pri- 


vileged citizen, also have a vote 
in the Ecclesia, 

ovdauod 8 émirdtrovros| As 
if bail were a new invention at 
Athens, and had never been 
heard of before the law of Ti- 
mocrates! Such shallow so- 
phistry would be almost incre- 
dible in a man of Demosthenes’ 
intellect and character but for 
the reasons just alleged. 

éws] See various readings, 
and compare § 63 n. 

§ 81. mdvres dv gyoaite] dv 
is omitted in Dindorf’s text, ap- 
parently by a printer’s error. 
It is of course absolutely re- 
quired by grammar. 

Lovov Kara Tovs véuous] ‘The 
only legal clause’ in Timocrates’ 
bill. 


av av vets KarayvGre] The 
phrase dvddvar Séxnv tivds is so 
familiar that it may be as well 
to point out that ay is mascu- 
line and refers to the subject of 
deéFovor: ‘that those whom you 
condemn should pay the pe- 
nalty.’ 

§§ 82, 83. Another piece of 
treachery in the wording of his 
decree. By saying the money 
instead of the legal penalty, and 
which he was sentenced to pay 
instead of which becomes due, 
he deprives the treasury of all 
the customary forfeitures for 
overdue payments, viz. twofold 
for civil purposes and tenfold for 
religious. 

§ 82. yéypamra] § 17 n. 
Here of course passive : ‘how is 
it worded?’ or as K. ‘ how does 
it go on after that?’ 


83 


158 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 82—85. 


by \ be 
Tovs éyyuntas 7 pay éexticeLy TO apydpiov O wdrev. 
a , \ 
évrav0l Tadw Tov pev® iepdv ypnudtav THY Sexa- 
/ c , a > ¢ / ¢ / > Ab 
Traclav vdynpntat, tov & oalwv, oTocwv év TO 
mos 0 TOUTO TroLEl; 
/ > \ \ an / > Te / ? \ de 
ypawas avtl pév Tod Tyunpatos TO apyvpLov, avTl dé 
€ \ 

0 adrcv. Siadéper dé TL; eb pev 
by4 / \ > \ 5 \ > / \ 
éypawre kafiotavat Tovs éyyuntas H nv exTioEW TO 

\ | ame 
Tina TO ylyVvoueVvoY, TpooTrEepLELAnper TODS VOMOUS 
av, Kal ods Ta pev SexaTAa, Ta O€ Kal Sura yiyve- 
Tal TOV OfANMAToV’ WoT €x TOUTwY Hv avayKn Tots 
dprovat TO yeypaupévoy T exTiverw Kal Tas éx TOV 
, / / / a) \c tal 
vomov Tpocovaas Cnuias KaTaBadnrew. viv Oé° TH 

U / 3 a ‘a 
yparar “ THY KaTacTacW Eivat TOV eyyUNnTOV H nV 
> / \ > , A 9 ”» 2 a t \ 
ExTicEely TO apyuvploy 0 wdrEev” ex THS ANEEws Kal 
TOV ypapmatov, ép ois Exactos cionyOn, Tovet Ti 

4 bs a ¢ a ad 5 b] , 
ExTLoW, €v ols TaoLW aTAodY, 6 Tis @PAEV, apryUpLoV 


EE ed 
vow SuTracageTat, TO HuLov. 


n \ 
TOU TO ryuyVvdmEVvo?, 


yéyparrras. 


® nev om. Z Bens. cum =. 


> +p om. Bens. cum =. 


© yey O° év Z Bens. cum >. 


dyvtl pev Tod Tiunmaros... 0 
aprev] ‘Had the orator not 
been led by the love of chagge 
of construction so sought after 
in Greek authors, he would have 
written dvti pév Tod ‘7d Tlunua.’ 
Shilleto on F, L. p. 391 § 159= 
176, On this ‘love of variety’ 
see also Androt.§ 36”. Above, 
§ 32”. K. somewhat weakens 
the force of the passage by trans- 
lating 6 dpXe throughout ‘ which 
he owed:’ it is really ‘which he 
was adjudged to pay,’ an dpAnua 
not an édefrnua, § 39 n. 

§ 83. mpoomeprecrjper] §§ 44 
n., 209. 

Ta per SexaTAG, Ta Oe Kal Surda] 
Explained § 111, rév pév dciwv 
THs Ourdaclas, Trav iepay dé THs 
dexardactas. 


Td yeypaumévov] ‘the sum set 
down in the plaint or written 
charge,’ éx rys Antews cal Trav 
ypaypdrwv ép’ otsExacros elajnxOn 
as it is explained below: opp. 
to 7d yryvéuevov, ‘that which 
accrues.’ In the law as it 
stands 7d yeypaupévoy was likely 
enough, according to the prac- 
tice in Athenian courts, to be 
construed as including 76 yyv6- 
pevov: but it suits Demosth. to 
make the worst of every phrase 
in the obnoxious document. 

év ols waow...yéypamta] ma- 
ow refers to the customary word- 
ing of such plaints: ‘in which 
the simple sum for which judg- 
ment had been given is always 
inserted,’ So K. nearly. 


727 


P. 727.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 159 
84 Mera tadta toivuy TnALKODTO TpPayua avedov ev 


Th TOV pnuatov peTabéces Tpocéypae “Tovs Sé 
mMpoédpous émuyelpoTovely éemavayKes, OTav Tis KaOL- 
otavat BovrAnTal,’ Tapa TavTa® TOY VvopoY oidpevos 
Seiy cole Tov nducnKota Kal Tov év tpiv HN@KOTA. 
Sods ydp btav BovAnTar THY KaTadoTacW avTo TOV 
eyyuntan, em éxelv@ wetroinke pndérroT exticar undé 
85 deOnvat. Tis yap ov Topteiras havrovs avOperrous, 
ovs étav vmeis amroxelpoToVnante aTrarrakeTal®; éav 
yap Tis ws ov KabioTayTa Tovs éyyunTas aévol de- 
Séc0at, dyjoet Kal Kabiotdvas Kal KatactyceL, Kal 


4 trap’ aravra Z Bens. cum =. 
© dmradddiovra Z Bens. cum TF vy, 


§§ 84, 85. By the clause that 
‘the Proedri shall be bound to 
put the question to the vote,’ he 
has put it in the debtor’s power 
never to go to prison. He has 
only to set up ‘men of straw,’ 
and on their rejection by you to 
declare that he is putting in bail 
and means to put them in again, 
and so on ad infinitum. 

§ 84. ryAtKotro mpayua dve- 
Adv] ‘Well then, having clear- 
ed so much out of the way by 
the change in the wording, he 
added a clause.’ By writing 
dytl pev Tov Tiunmatos Td apyv- 
ptov, &¢e. (§ di he had ‘knocked 
off’ the twofold and tenfold pe- 
nalties. For the sense of dve- 
Ae ef. Androt, § 20 n. 

émixetporovely amavayKes] Sup- 
posing the law to be in other 
respects unobjectionable, this 
provision might be necessary to 
prevent its benevolent inten- 
tions from being frustrated by 
personal spite. But the speaker 
evidently wishes his hearers to 
confuse it with a restriction on 
their right to reject the bail 


tendered. 

§ 85. dmaadd\déera:] An easy 
correction of Reiske’s adopted 
by nearly all editors: most MSS. 
having drad\déere, and the con- 
fusion of e« and a, pronounced 
alike in post-classical times, 
being perpetual. The Zurich 
edd. and Benseler follow = in 
reading dmad\dfovra and refer 
it to gavdous dvOpwrovs: ‘no- 
thing happens to the rejected 
bail.’ Apart from the harshness 
of the attraction of the nomina- 
tive (for of dwadddéovra:) this 
sense appears much less suit- 
able. Cobet Nov. Lect. p, 243 
restores the futurum exactum 
dmn\A\déerae here and in Lept. 
p. 465 § 28. ‘Non dadAdéerau, 
id est dre:ow, abibit, sententia 
postulat, sed liberatus erit id est 
amnA\Ndéera.? This is not im- 
probable, and is favoured by 
the perfect infinitives which 
follow, dedéc0ax ‘be kept in cus- 
tody,’ ade?cAa Tov Secpuod, ‘be 
and remain released.’ Comp. 
§ 60 n. 


160 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 85—88. 


/ \ , / aA / \ ¢ 
SelEeu Tov TovTov vomuov, 0s KaOioTavar ev OTaV 
BovrAnTar Kerevet, duraTTEW Se Téws OU Aéyet, OVO, 
x a \ 
av amoyetpotovnon? veils Tovs éyyunTas, TpocTaT- 
tet dedéa0at, GAN ws GrANOAs waoTrep areEipbdppwakoy 
> a > a / 
€ot. Tots adixety BovNopévots. 

86 J al ée ‘ Ul \ \ b] a >\ 
® 6€ KatactncarTt, dnol, Tovs éyyunTas, éav 
b] § 80 a , \ > U “8! RIDES ¢ / \ 
aTr0OLwe TH TONEL TO apytpLov éh © KaTéoTHGE TODS 
b] \ b] a lal PS af , | ay 3 , 
éyyuntas, adetc Oar Tov Secpod'. wandw éevradl éré- 
a «A tal 
pewwev él TOU KAKOUPYNMaATOS O LLKP@ TpoTEpor eEl- 
\ > 5 , > ” d , \ 
Tov, Kal ovK émeNaOeTo, oVd éypae Td Tiunua TO 
/ aa \ \ > / a : >’ lal 
ylyvomevov, aAAa TO apyuUpLov O wddev, Edy aTrodLde@, 
> n n lal 
adetc bat Tod Secpod. 
> \ \ \ / b] t x ee x ie | 
87 Kap 6€ wn KataBarn Tdpyipiov 7 avTos 7 oF éy- 
n Ul \ 
yuntal ért THs évatns TpuTavelas, Tov pev ée&eyyun- 
Oévra Sedéc0a, Tov 8 eyyuntév Snpoolav eivas Tv 
ovclav. év d) TO TeXEUTAl@ TOUT@ TaVTEAMS AUTOS 

¢ lal n 
QaUTOU KaTHYoOpOS, WS abiKEl, yeyovas havynceTat. ov 
yap bras TO Sedéc0a Twa THY TOMTOY aloxpoY 7 


f ép @—decpuov om. Z Bens. cum ATQkrs et pr. =. 


guddrrew dé Téws ov héye] 
The absurdity of this quibble is 
pointed out by the old commen- 
tator Jerome Wolf. As a sound 
English lawyer, Kennedy ob- 
serves: ‘Assuming that, accord- 
ing to the true construction of 
the statute, bail might be offered 
more than once; still, after fail- 
ing to justify bail, the party 
would have to go to prison in 
the mean time, until he found 
other bail.’ 

drekipdpyaxovy] ‘a sovereign 
remedy, antidote.’ So in Plato, 
Laws x11. 957, the written law 
is, in the eye of the judge, a)eé- 
pdpyaxov TSv dd\X\wv Abywr, pre- 
serving his mind from being 


biassed by witnesses or counsel. 

§ 86. The objection already 
urged in § 82 is repeated. 

T@ 6é karacrnoavT:] For the 
construction of the dative, § 40 
N. 

éréuwewev érl Tov Kakoupynua- 
Tos] ‘persisted in the artifice,’ 
as K. The mere repetition of 
the words is treated as a fresh 
offence. 

§ 87. His proposed remedy, 
imprisonment after the ninth 
prytany, and confiscating the 
property of the bail, is illusory, 
and is meant to be. The bird 
will have flown. 

évdrns mputavelas] §§ 15 n., 
40 n. 


P. 728. | KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 161 


a \ A \ \ \ 
Seuvov voloas aretre pn Seiv, GX TOV KaLpoY, ev 
a a / ” 
@ TOV no“KnKoTa évnv TapovTa NaBetv, exxrepas Tov- 
BA a a 
voua pev® THS TYyswplas EdwTrE Tots adiKovpévots Vpiv, 
\ the a. 4 > \ > Ns 54 
To 8 épyov adeireto. Kal wap axdvtav e&axev 
” n 2 TB / 3 an 4 / \ , 
abeow Tois Ta tuerepa aktovow éxew Bia, Kal wovov 
> / / > a an 2 fal \ A 
ov mpocéyparve Sixny é€eivas Nayeivy avTe Kata TOV 
SuxacTav TOV TpooTiunodvTwY TOD Secmod. 
a \ al , 
88 “O 8é, rordA@y bvTwv Kal Sear dv év TO VOMO 
, / >. / > bl] > lal / 
TéOeike, wadioT akévov éot ayavaxtnoat, BovdAopat 
an J na 
mpos vas eireitv. Sv’ OXov yap Tov vo“ov TO KaTa- 
, \ > \ WA 4 a QX\ \ 
oTHTaYTL TOUS éyyunTas AtravTa réyet, TO 5€é pn) KAL- 
t / / / / Sh g 
oTavTe unte BEXTioUS MITE NElpous, 40 * OAWS TrPOT- 
a a / 
éyovTs Tov voov vpiv, ovdewiav ovTE Siknv ovTE TYLw- 
, 
plav mpooyéypadev, GAN adevav TweTolnKe ToTavTHV 
\ \ 
bony otdv Te yevéoOar TrEloTHY. Kal yap TOV xpo- 


& uev om. Z cum pro =. 


daretre pn Seiv] ‘he forbade 
imprisonment.’ § 57 n. 

Tov Kapov éxxdéWas] ‘after 
robbing you, cheating you out 
of the (only) favourable oppor- 
tunity.’ Cf. éxxrérrwy, § 80 n. 

Tiuwptas] ‘redress,’ as K., i.e. 
recouping themselves (riwwpetv 
éavrots) rather than punishing 
the offender (riuwpeicbar rov 
abixovvra). 

map akdyTrwy dwKev adeow] 
‘granted a discharge from you 
against your will’: judy sup- 
plied from vyérepa. 

Lbvov ob mpocéypawe] ‘all but 
added a clause.’ While he was 
about it, he might as well have 
done so: it would not have been 
much more impudent, 

§§ 88—90. The orator winds 
up his objections under this 
head with a climax, the most 
sophistical of all. He has pro- 
vided no penalty for not putting 


W. Dz. 


h un? libri. Illud e coni. Frankii. 


in bail: therefore a man has 
only to do nothing, and take no 
notice of your decrees, to escape 
scot-free. To sum up the objec- 
tions to his law, it unsettles all 
that has been done in the past: 
it gives efficacy to the verdicts of 
juries with one hand, and takes 
it away with the other: it re- 
stores the franchise to debtors 
who have not satisfied their ob- 
ligations. It places you, the 
Athenian people, in a ridiculous 
position: Critias himself could 
have done no worse. 

§ 88. obre dixny otre Tiuwplar] 
dixny is here ‘action,’ ‘way of 
bringing him to justice,’ not 
‘penalty’ as K. 

ddevav...rrelorny] ‘hascreated 
the most complete impunity 
that can be’ K., who adds: ‘this 
objection is more clearly cap- 
tious than the former, which 
fellunder Wolf’s animadversion. 


11 


89 


go 


162 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 88—92. 


vov dy Sidpice, THY EVATHY TpUTaVElay, TO KATATTH- 
CAVTL Néyet TOs eyyunTas. yvoln & av tis exeiOev’ 
mpocéypawre Snuoclay ecivar tiv ovoiav Thy TeV 
eyyunTarv, av un Tis éxticn’ Tod Sé pa) KaTacTHCAV- 
Tos ovK eve SiTrovOevy UTapyew eyyunTas. Kal Tots 
bev Trpoédpots, of KexAnpopévos xabifovow €F buon, 
éravaykes éroincev, OTav KabioTH Tis, SéyerOat 
tois 8 adiucodou TV ToAW ovdeulay Tpocéyparrev 
avayKknv, AN @otrep evepyéTats aipecw avtois édw- 
kev ef xpn Sodvast Sixny 7 7. 

Kaitou was av dovpdopdtepos viv tovTou yé- 
VOLTO VOMOS 1) KAKLOV ExwV ; Os TP~TOV meV TEepl TOV 
éx Tov TaperAnAvOoTos ypovou KpLOévTav évavTia Tots 
vp vuav éyvwcpévors TpooraTre, Sevtepov Sé rept 
TOV meANOVTOV KpLOncEr Oat TPOTTLMAaV KENEV@Y TOUS 
Sixactas Tovs 6wopmoKotas Akupa Ta TpocTimHnpata 
TovEel, Tpos SE ToUTOLS émruTimous Tors dpelNoVTAs Ov 
Ta Tpoonkovta éxtivovtas Kabiotnow, dros 8 éme- 
Selxvuct waTnv opvivtas, TYbdvTas, SuxalovTas, dpryt- 
Coévous, atravta ToodytTas vuds. éyo pev yap, el 
Kpitias 6 yevouevos tav tpiaxovt eiaédepe TOv vO- 
ov, ovK av Gov TpoTrov olipar yparpavT’ eiceveryKetv 
1) TOUTOV. 


For surely a man who had never 
offered bail would not have the 
benefit of the statute of Timo- 
crates, but would remain sub- 
ject to the old law.’ 

§ 89. of KexAnpwuévo. kabl- 
fovow é& tudv] ‘who sit as cho- 
sen by lot from among you’; 
the jury (vue?s) are treated as a 
fraction of the people, as in 
§§$ 11, 25. On the mode of no- 
minating the proedri see § 21 n. 

déxec0a] Artfully substituted 
for émtxerporoveiv (§ 84) in order 


to suggest that the people’s 
rights are being invaded, 

§ 90. émideixvvor pdrnv dp- 
vivras] K.’s rendering of these 
participlesis worth the attention 
of the student; ‘exhibits you 
as persons whose oaths, whose 
assessments, whose verdicts, 
whose punishments, all of whose 
acts are ineffectual.’ 

0 yevduevos Tw Tpidxovra] The 
Thirty are named in §§ 42, 56- 
7, alluded to in § 76: where see 
notes. 


729 


gi 


g2 


P. 729.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 163 


an \ 
“Ort Toivuy OrAnY GvyXEl THY ToNTElaV Kal KaTAa- 
Avet TavTa TA Tpaypyal 6 vOMOS, Kal TOANAS hidoTI- 
an “a / \ lal / ¢ lal 
pias Teptatpeitas THS TOAEWS, Kal TOUTO Pgdiws Uuas 
/ ld BA \ / ay @ f 
voila pabnocecOat. tote ydp Sntrov Tod0’, OTL owLe- 
/ ¢ a ¢ / \ \ / \ 
Tab TOAAaKLS NuUaV 7 TOMS Sid Tas OTpaTElas Kal 
\ 
Tas vauTiKas Kal Tas meCds, Kal moAXa Kal Kara 
TodnNaKkis non Siepakacbe Kal cdcartés Tivas Kal 
na 3 
TLuMpHnoapmevos Kal SiaddaEavTes. Tas ovV; avayKN 
nr lal 8 / \ / 

Ta TovavTa S.orKelv ott Sia Whdicpatov Kal vopov 
a \ \ a 
Tols pev eiodépewy EmiTaTTovTas, Tovs Sé Tpinpapyxeiv 

/ \ \ lal \ > @ a a 
KeNEVOVTAS, TOUS O€ TAEiY, TOUS 8 Exacta TroLEly OV 
lal an an / 
del. ovKxodv Tadl otras ylyyntat, SixacTHpia TAN- 
a \ n > , 
povre Kal KkatayvyveoKete Secpov TOV AkKoTMOVYTMV. 
n n ’ rn / 
oxéac0e 8n Tov TOU Kadod Kayalod TovTOU vomor, 


§§ 91—95. This law deranges 
our whole political system, espe- 
cially in time of war: and robs 
Athens of her most cherished 
distinctions. Our imperial posi- 
tion depends upon prompt mili- 
tary action, and that again upon 
the power of the State to enforce 
instant obedience to its demunds, 
whether for personal service or 
war-taxes. Neither our allies, 
our enemies, nor the occasions of 
war will wait for such leisurely 
preparation as will alone be pos- 
sible, when no one need pay any- 
thing till the last month of the 
year. We may think ourselves 
lucky, if while all goes well and 
we are weighted by no such ab- 
surd enactment, we are never 
behindhand with our enemies. 
The extreme penalty of the law 
would not be too great for the 
author of such a decree. 

§ 91. gidoryuias] Androt. 
§§ 73 n., 75. 

otpareias] Many MSS., but 


not the best, read orparids as in 
§ 93. It is a well-known rule 
that orparia4 sometimes=orpa- 
tela, but orparela never =orpa- 
rid. In the latter passage there 
does not appear to be any vari- 
ety of reading. 

kal cwoavrés Twas] ‘either in 
rescuing people or punishing or 
mediating.’ K. 

§ 92. droxe?vy] ‘administer, 
carry out,’ with especial refer- 
ence to financial arrangements: 
see § 27 n., § 93. 

elogpépew] In the technical 
sense of property tax: Androt. 
§ 61 n. 

dixaornpia mwAnpov’re] Like 
TAnpovv vatv ‘to man a ship,’ 
this means ‘to impanel juries,’ 
not to fill the courts with de- 
fendants. 


aKxocnovvTwy] ‘refractory.’ 


‘‘ Widerhaarigen,’ Benseler. 


Kadov karya0ov] Androt. § 32 
m., § 47 n.—Dvpalvera, §§ 95, 
102. 


11—2 


93 ©s Avpaiverat TadTa Kal SdiadOeiper. 


94 


95 


164 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 93—96. 


/ 
yéyparrat 
\ 8 > fal , ) an \ ” a ) 
yap Snmov év TO vouw avtod, Kal el Twt TOV odeL- 
/ : rn 3 
NovTwy TpocTeTiuytar Seapod 7) Kal TO NowTroV Tpoo- 
a 5 4 
TiyLnOn, Eival KaTaATTHCAaYTL éyyuNnTas, 7 mynV emt 
a / > a 
THS EvaTNS TpuTavelas ExTicELY TO apyUpLoV, adeta Bat 
rn a Ss / / > / 
Tov Seapuov. Tis ovv Topos éoTal; Tiv aTooTadn- 
¢ fal A, / , 
SETA TPOTOY 7) OTPATLA; TAS TA YpHnuaTa eioTrpago- 
pev', éav Exactos odrioKavey éyyuntas KabioTH 
KATA TOV TOVTOV VOMOV, AANA fy) TO TPOTHKOV Troy ; 
épodpev v7) Ala tots “EdAXnoe “ Timoxpatous vomos 
“éorl map nuiv’ avayelvat ovv Thy évaTny TpuUTa- 
“ s..9 1 ok » ? a \ , A > 
velav’ eita TOT * éEwpev"’ TodTO yap AovTrov. av 6 
¢ \ ¢ nF ee bl / @ bé > / ? by @ \ 
Umrép tuaov' aitaév aduiverOa dén, dpa y olcaOe Tovs 
? C. 5A a 
éyOpovs tas Tév Tap nly Tovnpev diadvoes Kal 
Kakoupylas avamevelv ; ) THY TOALW, aVTHV €uTrodiCov- 
Tas vosous eb Ojoetat Kal TavavTia TOV cuvppepov- 
ToV AéyovTas, SuYnoETOal TL TOLnoaL TOV SEeoVYTOD ; 
aXn’ adyarnrov, ® avopes “A@nvaiot, ei TavTwv Kaas 
a \ \ v U / 
éydvTov nuiv, Kal pndevds ovTos ToLovTOV vopmou, 
an lal “A \ n bd / 
Kpatoimev Tav éyOpav Kai tais o€0tHow Suvaipeba 


i eiompdiwuev Bens. cum 2. 


Kk efrd ror Z Bens. cum >. 


1 yuwv Z Bekk. Bens. cum =FTOQ v. 


§ 93. ed...mpooreriunrat...7... 
mpooriunOy| §§ 39 n., 79. 

Ta xpnuata elompdtouev] An- 
drot. § 60. 

GANA wh Td TpocHnKoy tog] ‘in- 
stead of doing his duty.’ § 77 n. 

§ 94. elra ror’ @iuev] The 
reconditior lectio of 2, the Zu- 
rich editors and Benseler, cird 
wor &ipev, is not improbably 
right, though against all the 
other MSS. 

vuav] The evidence clearly 
preponderates in favour of 7- 
pov. 

avapevetv] The future is re- 


quired, and is adopted by all 
modern Edd. Bekker says ‘Li- 
bri dvapévew’: but Benseler 
and the Zurich editors cite the 
true reading as in ‘> corr’: as 
does Dindorf, Praef. p. xliii. 

§ 95. rats dé0ryo.] Like xae- 
pots, this is evidently to be taken 
with dxodovbeiv: ‘keep pace with 
sudden emergencies,’ as K. He 
notices, however,that the French 
translator Auger took it as an 
instrumental dative: ‘par la 
promptitude de nos prépara- 
tifs,’ 


730 


P. 730.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 165 


\ an nr / a > a \ \ 
Kal Tois ToD ToAgmou KaLpois aKoXovOEiy Kal pndevos 
n \ 
voTtepilew. addrAAA pnv eb halver ToLovTOY TEeMELKads 
, \ \ an / ¢ / \ 
vomov, 0 Ta ToLAaVTA AVmaiveTas St wY 7 TONS Kal 
\ / fal > 
ceuvn Kal AauTpa Tapa Tact KaléaTHKeE, THS OVX 
duxalws oTvody av Twabots ; 
9S a 
96 “Ere tolvuv, & advdpes “AOnvaior, tHv Swvoiknow 
> n / ) e \ \ \ ¢ / ¢ ‘ > \ 
avaipel, THY @ iepav Kal Thv dciav. ws Se, eyo 
gpacw. éotw viv Kplos vomuos, KaXws ElTEp TIS 
ee. 4 ‘ 4 , e \ \ \ 
Kal ddros KElpwevos, TOUS EXOVTAS TA TE LEPA KAL TA 
dola yYpynpata KaTaBadr«eW eis TO BovdeUTHpLOD, Et 


dalver...reBerxws] ‘you are 
seen to have passed,’ not ‘ you 
appear.’ So Benseler, rightly. 
Cf. Androt. § 21 n. 

ceuvy Kal Naurpa...xabéornKe] 
‘has become respected and ho- 
noured:’ ‘geachtet und beriihmt,’ 
Benseler. 

§§ 96—101. Once more, the 
law of Timocrates ruins (not 
merely our imperial policy, but) 
our whole finances, both sacred 
and civil. The ordinary reve- 
nues derived from taxes do not 
suffice: we must look sharply to 
the so-called ‘extra payments.’ 
These are now enforced by the 
summary process applied to the 
farmers of the revenue, i.e. by 
imprisonment: if this wholesome 
pressure be removed, as it is by 
your law, accumulated deficits, 
bankruptcy, and dissolutionstare 
us in the face. I swppose you 
think THE PEOPLE, the senate 
and the courts can go unpaid ; 
but you took pay yourself for 
proposing this law. You did not 
venture to disturb the existing 
enactments as regards farmers 
of taxes: you ought at least to 
have added a clause providing 
that debts from other defaulters, 
now recovered under those laws, 


should continue to be so recover- 
ed. But this is precisely what, 
to serve your friends, you did 
not do: and the consequences are 
&c. &c. [The repetition here 
becomes somewhat wearisome. | 

§ 96. gorw vyuivy Kdbpros...xel- 
fevos] ‘You have a law in force, 
and a good one too, if ever there 
was one such’: ‘there is no 
better existing’ is K.’s less lite- 
ral rendering. Comp. above, 
§ 4, elwep Twi Tovro xal d\A\w 
TpoonkdyTws elpynrat, voul fw kapot 
vuv apudorrew elretv. Jelf, § 895. 
2. 


Tovs €xovras Ta TE iepd Kal Ta 
8cra] The class of public debt- 
ors, to which Androtion and 
his associates belonged, is here 
distinguished from two other 
classes. A man could not be 
imprisoned merely for being in 
arrear (Urepnuepos) with taxes, 
even with the eicgopa or extra- 
ordinary contribution (Boeckh, 
P. E. p. 386). Here the princi- 
ple was laid down, that his pro- 
perty and not his person was 
responsible: though, as the 
notes to the next section will 
show, the practice in bad times 
was not quite on a level with 
the theory. The legal reme- 


97 vomots Tots TEA@VLKOTS. 


5 


166 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


[$$ 96—99 


\ \ \ \ > \ > / / a 
Sé pu, THY Boudry avtovs eiomrpaTTe Ypwméevny Tois 


da Tolvuy Tod vomov TovToU 


a /, 
Siovxetras Ta Kowa Ta yap eis Tas éxxAnolas Kal 
\ ‘ \ \ \ \ \ e , 
tas Ovcias Kalb thy BovrAnv Kai Tovs imméas kal 
v / > > ‘ ® LU > > ¢ / ¢ 
TANNA YPNMAT avadioKomeva, oVTOS eo 6 Vopmos 6 


ToL@V TpocevTropEeta Gat. 


dies were 7d Ta xwpla Snuevew 
kal ras olklas kal ratr’ amoypd- 
gew (Androt. §§ 54—5): and it 
was made a charge against An- 
drotion on the former occasion 
that, having undertaken the 
collection of arrears for the 
state, he dragged men off to 
prison, which was illegal even 
in the case of resident aliens 
(€5e:s xal UBpiges wodlras avOpd- 
mous kal rods TaXatrwpous merol- 
kous, ibid.): apart from the fact 
that in many instances nothing 
was really due, and his conduct 
was wantonly oppressive and 
extortionate (ib. §§ 56—58). 
Another and much more strin- 
gent rule was applied to all who 
were directly concerned in the 
collection of taxes, the classes 
enumerated in §§ 40, 144 of the 
present speech: these, as the 
senate-house was the place 
where their payments were 
made, the moment they fell 
into arrear might be imprisoned 
at the discretion of the senate 
(Boeckh, P. E. pp. 338, 340). 
Androtion and his colleagues in 
the embassy were not reAGvai, 
but they held in their hands 
public balances for which they 
had not accounted, viz. the 
prize-money from the sale of 
the condemned ship: as such 
they came under the vépot Tedw- 
vixol, and were liable to impri- 
sonment until Timocrates pass- 
ed his privilegium in their 
favour. 


> \ v id a a 
OV Yap OVTMY LKaYOV TOV 


Tois vomos Tots TedwviKors] 
Loosely rendered in Boeckh (l.c. 
p. 337) ‘laws of the custom du- 
ties,’ and in L. and S. ‘ the ex- 
cise and custom laws’: much 
more accurately by the English 
and German translators, ‘ the 
statutes which relate to the far- 
mers of taxes,’ ‘den Gesetzen 
tiber die Zollpiichter.’ They 
were not mepl ta TéAn, but sept 
Tovs TeAXWvas: Smuggling, for in- 
stance, though punished se- 
verely and capriciously, would 
not come under the véuor TedXw- 
vixol, though connivance at 
smuggling on the part of a re- 
Awvns doubtless might. One of 
their principal provisions was 
that of the senator’s oath in 
§ 144 with regard to the impri- 
sonment of persons connected 
with the revenue. 

§ 97. tolvw] Exactly our 
‘Well, then,’ at the beginning 
of a sentence: a connecting par- 
ticle with the slightest possible 
shade of inferential meaning. 

mpocevrropetcbar] The com- 
mon reading spoeu7. rests only 
on inferior MSS. and is not re- 
quired: ‘more fully provided’ 
yields just as good a sense as 
‘provided beforehand.’ On ev- 
mopety and its compounds cf. 
Sandys on pro Phorm. p. 962 
§ 57. 

ob yap SvTwy ixavdv] The 
‘chronic deficits’ of the period, 
especially during the Social 
War, have been already noticed 


731 


98 


99 


P. 731.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


167 


€K TOV TENOV YPNHUATaV TH SLto“KnoEL, TA TpoTKATA- 
a / / 
Brypatr ovopafoueva Sa Tov Tov vou“ov TovTOU 


poBov cataBanrnrerTat. 


a S ’ WA Seosy oP 
T@S OVV OVY ATTAVT AVAYKNH 


fal \ a vA e \ A n 
KaTAaNVOAVaL TA THS TOAEWS, OTAV aL Mev TOY TENOV 


0 OR ES 
KaTtaBonal pn ixaval dor™ 


TH Stotknoet, GAN évdén 


TONAGY, Kal pondé TavTa arr 7 Tepl AnyovTa 
Tov évauvTov 4 AaBeiv, Ta Sé tpocKaTaBAnpaTa 
/ 5 ¢ \ 
Tous pn tiOévtas pn Kupia 4” 9 BovdrAn pndée Ta 
Sicactynpia Shoat, adda Kafioteow éyyuntas dype 
Ths évatns mputavelas; Tas 8 6xTa® Ti Toinoopmer; 
SE , L ae. \ , 7 
etre, Tiudxpates’ ov ovvipev Kai Bovrevoducla, éav Te 


™ [dor] Bens. e coni. 


(Androt. § 48 n.; above, § 797.): 
and the hungriness of the ex- 
chequer at such times showed 
itself in very unserupulous pro- 
ceedings. Thus, traps were laid 
for the resident aliens in order 
to bring them under the law 
(Boeckh, P. EH. p. 394): steps 
were taken, through the courts, 
to transfer men from the more 
favoured to the less favoured 
categories—to convert an ddel- 
wy or drepypuepos into an é6pdAav 
(Androt. § 34n.; above, §§ 39, 
50),and then to exact forfeitures, 
such as those described in § 82: 
informations and prosecutions, 
which might be purely mali- 
cious, were encouraged (Lys. c. 
Nicom. § 22). This brings us 
to 


Th TpockaraBrnuar dvouats- 
peva] ‘the so-called extra pay- 
ments’: doubtless a euphemism 
for the fines and forfeitures just 
noticed. It is even possible 
that Demosth. in his use of évo- 
pagoueva is indulging in a little 
grim humour at the expense of 
the ‘peculiar institutions’ by 
which the state ‘conveyed’ the 


und Bens. e. coni. Voem. 


property of individuals into the 
public chest. The earlier wri- 
ters were perplexed by these 
mpooxaraBAjuata, here clearly 
distinguished from ai rév reXav 
xaraBoXal in the next §. Even 
Boeckh professes himself unable 
to explain why they should be 
called ‘ additional’ (l.c. pp. 343 
—4). The explanation given is 
that of A. Schaefer (Demo- 
sthenes, 1. 342) adopted also by 
Schoemann (Antig. p. 451 n.) 
and by Mr Whiston in an ex- 
cursus on the present passage. 

§ 98. évdéy woddAGr] ‘Scil. 
h Stolknois,’ R. W. Really, of 
course, 77 dvorxjoet, if the sub- 
ject of an impersonal verb needs 
to be expressed: ‘ when there is 
a large deficit, which cannot be 
made up till towards the close 
of the year, and the senate and 
courts are not authorised to 
imprison those who do not pay 
up the fines which have ac- 
crued ’...So K. nearly. 

§ 99. od cdviuev Kal Bovdev- 
goueba] ‘Shall we cease to 
meet and deliberate in case of 
need? If so, shall we still be 


» ; 168: KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 99-102. 


ry¥y 965 eit’ br Snmoxparna opeba:; ov Stxaces Ta SiKa- 
~~ ernpeata te isia Kal ra Onpoota ; Kab Tis vmapéer 
Tois abdikovpévois acdadea; ovK eloetow 7 Bovrr) 
\ PS) , \ > lal / \ \ » > 
Kal OloLKNnoEL TA EK TOV VOomwY; Kal Ti roLTrOV écO 
al > 
nuiv adr 7 Katared\vcbar; adrAa vn Ai’, dpicbi 
TavTa Toioopev; Kal mas ov Seuvov, eb Sia Tov 
/ c\ \ / \ \ ” ¢ lel 
vomov, Ov av Téeikas pic Oov AaBdr, dpiabos 6 SHpmos 
kai  BovdA») Kal ta Sixactypia éotar; yphv yap 
TOUTO yé ce, © Timoxpates, Mpooypaar TO vopg, 
Omrep €Troleis KATA TOV TEAWVOV Kal TOV éyyUNTaP?®, 


Ioo 


i779 \ > / > 1AX \ / XN / 
Kal € KATA TLV@OV EV AAW TLL VoLM 7 WHnhicpaTL 
“ \ ’ \ y U e > fh 5 \ 
Tas avTas elpntar mpakers @v odelAovow eEivat, as 
“qepi TOV TEXWYOV, Kal KaTa TOUTMY ElvaL TAS 
¢ a 
“apakeis KATA TOLS UTAPYoVTAas VOmoUS.” VOV dé KUKA@ 732 
, / 
pevywv Tovs vomovs Todvs TEAWVLKOLS, OTL TO WHdicpa 
/ 
TO Evxtnpovos eipnke TpaTTew Tovs MpPANKOTAS KATA 


Io 


La 


° v. not. 


living under a free government?’ 
(Snuoxparncbueba, cf. § T5n., 
vouos Odvyapxtas Suapéper.) 
elcecowv] Distinguished from 
otviwey above: the people meet- 
ing in the Pnyx are said cuvép- 
xeoOat, the senate in their co- 
vered Bouleuterion cicépxecOa. 
Stoxnoet TA Ex vouwv}| ‘trans- 
act their constitutional busi- 
ness,’ K. Rather, I think, ‘ad- 
minister the legal revenues’: 
it seems better to give a con- 
sistent sense to doxety and 
dcolxnors throughout these §§. 
duso8os 6 Syuos] An argu- 
ment likely to be the most tell- 
ing of all with the jury: cf. § 95. 
§ 100. Timocrates had known 
better than to alarm the people 
by tampering with the laws re- 
lating to the farmers of taxes: 
had he been an honest man, he 
would have extended this provi- 


sion to all debts which under the 
existing law were recovered in 
the same way. 

kara Tov Tehwvay] ‘ against,’ 
‘gegen,’ Benseler: but compare 
§59n. In § 40 the law-com- 
piler writes epi throughout, 
The words ras mpdéers kara Tovs 
UrdpxovTas vomous, as repeated 
after éyyunTdy, as well as at the 
end of the sentence, are brack- 
eted by G. H. Schaefer, ex- 
punged by all recent editors. 

§ 101. Kirrw pevywr] ‘ care- 
fully avoiding,’ as K.: ‘going 
out of his way to avoid them,’ 
‘giving them a wide berth.’ 

76 Whpicpna Td Hixrjuovos] The 
decree called by the speaker 
youn SKawordry in § 13, that 
the prize-money should be ex- 
acted from the trierarchs, and 
that a dcadccacia should decide 
the question of liability as be- 


102 







P.732.] KATA TIMOKPATOT UNIVBRSI" 


\ ino Ry / 
TOUTOUS TOvS VopoUS, Sia TADT ov Tpocé 
n \ ¢ 
éx S€ TOUTOU TOU TpOTTOU THY méEv VTTAapYoUTA 
\ / / 
pilav \Voas KATA TOV TA THS TOAEWS EYOVTMD, ETEPAV 
> , Ul p / \ / > > n 6n 
& ov mpocypaas” ravra Ta Tpdyyat avaipet, 57- 
¢ , \ he Wye sa ue ” 
pov, imméas, BovAnv, tepa, do1a’ av? wv, dvTeEp 
val a \ 
vuets, @ avopes "AOnvaior, cwhpov7te, koNacOels Kat 
PS) :,! b / od n o/ LO / 
ovs aklav Sixknv tots Gddows Tapadevypa yevnoeT ar 
/ 
bn TLOévar TOLOVTOUS VOmoUS. 
/ wv a 
Ou tolvuy povov Ta Sikactnpia akupa Tote TwV 
a rn \ 
TpooTLunpaT@Vv, GAA Kal Tois adiKodaL Ta KOWAa 
\ c \ / / 
didwow adevav, Tas vTép THs Todkews oTpaTelas 
\ / nr , 
Avpalverat, THY Swoiknow Katadver, Tos KaKOUproLS 
a / \ a ? / 
kat Tois TaTpadolats Kal Tols aotpate’Ttous Bon- 


P ypayas Z Bekk. Bens. cum =. 


tween them and the ambassa- 
dors: a decree unsuccessfully 
impeached by the partisans of 
Androtion, § 14. 

mpdrrew Tovs SpPprAnkoTas] The 
full construction is mpdrrew 
twd Tt: the accus, rei is here 
omitted.—riuwpiav, as in § 87, 
‘redress against defaulters’ ra- 
ther than ‘ punishment.’ 

§§ 102—107. Besides the 
ruinous impunity accorded to 
public debtors, T.’s law abolish- 
es, by parity of reasoning, the 
punishment of imprisonment now 
in force against other criminals, 
such as those guilty of theft, ill- 
treatment of parents, or neglect 
of military service. Unlike So- 
lon, whose legislation improves 
both the living and the unborn, 
you put a premium on crime: 
for the benefit of thieves, unna- 
tural children, and shirkers, you 
propose laws to our disadvan- 
tage. 

§ 102. The sentence down to 
karahvec is a brief summary of 


the effects of T.’s law upon the 
finances (cf. argument, §§ 79— 
101). There is no doubt, there- 
fore, that Dobree improves the 
passage by transposing dA\d kat 
after xaradver, where the orator 
turns to its effect upon other 
classes of criminals (ad\\d. kal Tots 
kaxovpyo.s x.T.A.): but no editor 
has ventured to introduce the 
alteration into the text. 
mwatpadolas| It is quite in 
Demosthenes’ way to use the 
most offensive term, and to in- 
sinuate what he does not ven- 
ture directly to assert, that 
Timocrates was tampering with 
the laws relating to murder and 
parricide. But marpadolas (d- 
Aodw, to thresh corn) means 
indifferently one who ‘strikes,’ 
or ‘slays’ a parent: the German 
‘schlagen,’ and the by-forms 
‘thresh, thrash,’ illustrate the 
double meaning. Comp. Aris- 
toph. Ran. 149 7 unrép’ Hrdnoevr, 
) warpds yvd0ov | érdratev, 7 
*@lopkov Spxov wuocev, With vv. 


103 


170 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 102—104 


a / 
Godvra TéHeike TOV vomov. Tas yap UTapyovcas éx 


TOV VoV KUpioV vopwy Timwplas KaTadvEL. REYOVYTOV 


\ a / "A ? a 
yap TeV vouov ods €Onke Yorwv, ovdév bpovos ov 
, bé >: if ¢ a fal \ \ 67 
TOUT vo“obEeTns, eay Tis AND KAOTAS Kal pn TYNOA 
, a 
Gavatov, tpoctipay atte Seopov, cal édv Tis adovs 


THS KAKOTEwS TOV yovéwr eis THY ayopav éuBadry, 


, x > yy / a ? a 
dedéo Oat, Kav aotpatelas Tis OPAN Kal TL TOV aVTOV 


274—276 of the same play: AI. 
Karetdes ody mov Tovs marpadolas 
avré0. | kal rods émidpxous, ods 
Edeyev quiv; HA. od 6 ob; | AT. 
yh rov Ilocedw "ywye, cal vuvt 
y’ 6p®: where the last line is 
spoken at the audience, whom 
Aristophanes did not mean even 
in jest to accuse of anything 
worse than ‘assault and bat- 
tery.’ Hence K.’s rendering ‘ per- 
sons who strike their fathers,’ 
is better than Benseler’s ‘ Vater- 
morder.’ In common sense and 
fairness, T.’s decree had left 
these and all other laws, except 
those relating to public debtors, 
just where it found them. 

§ 103. 2éd\wv] The same com- 
parison occurs Androt. §§ 25, 
30, below §§ 106, 113. 

Bh Tiunly Oavdrov] riwnOy is 
of course impersonal, ‘if a sen- 
tence of death be not passed.’ 
Cf. §§ 39, 63n., 105. 

mpooTimav air@ Secudv] On 
§ 2 I have argued against the 
notion that mpooripay can ever 
be simply =r.wdév: and I see no 
difficulty in bringing the pre- 
sent passage under the rule. 
The imprisonment was ‘in ad- 
dition to’ the restitution, two- 
fold or tenfold as the case might 
be prescribed by the law itself 
in §105. There is slight MS. 
authority for Secuod, which 
Taylor wished to introduce as 
more usual: 


G. H. Schaefer 


points out that both construc- 
tions are right, instancing deopdv 
in § 114. 

THS KaKwoews TOV yovéwy] On 
Atimia for this offence, § 60. 

els THv ayopdy éuBdddy] Se. 
éaurov ‘intrude,’ the regular 
phrase for an Atimos presum- 
ing to enter the Ecclesia as a 
citizen. Exclusion from the 
Agora did not imply that he 
was ‘ boycotted’ in the market: 
cf, Androt. § 77. Above, § 60n. 
Aesch. c. Timarch. § 164, ris 
yap ovx épet Sérecra éuBddrews 
els THY dyopay  oTEepavol 7% mpar- 
Tels TL TW avTuy nuiv’; id. de 
F. L. § 148, ov xadapos ay rds 
xetpas els THY dryopay éuBarders. 
Lycurg. c. Leocr. § 5 els ryv 
dyopav éuBaddovra kal Tv KoLwr 
iepav weréxovra. This intransi- 
tive use is not noticed in Reiske’s 
Index. 

kav aorparelas Tis SpAy] ‘If 
a man be fined for desertion’ 
K. but this is hardly accurate. 
The ypagn aorpareias, for fail- 
ing to join the colours on being 
summoned by the general, is 
to be distinguished from the 
ypapn uroorpariov, Aurorakziou 
(these, and not der. are the 
correct forms) for desertion or 
leaving the ranks after having 
joined (Dict. Antig. 8s. vv.). 
A more correct rendering will 
therefore be ‘ convicted of fail- 
ing to serve.’ In § 119 we have 


P. 733.| 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


171 


a b] / tal \ ca) / , 
Tots éTtTipwous Troln, Kal ToUTOV SedécOat, TioKparns 


amact Tovroiu ddevav Tote, 
b] al \ \ > a ¢/ 7+ na \ 
104 éyyuntav Tov Secpov adaipov. WaT Emouye Soxel (Kal 


/ a 
TH KaTacTacEL TOV 


‘ \ / 
yap et poptixatepor eivat TO pnOnodpevor S0Fe, NEEw 
Kab ovK atoTpéwouat) KaTa ToODTO avTO a&Lov avTov 


Lal vs? v n > / 
etvat Oavat@ Enudcat, W’ év “Aidov tois aceBéot 


A fal \ / ¢ a) \ \ an ne a 
07 TovTOV TOV Vomov, nuas Sé ToVs CadvTas ToiaSe TOS 


e / \ / 2A \ \ a 

oaios Kal dixaious €a& TO AowTrov ypnoPat. 
/ 

dé Kal ToUTOUS TOvS VOpmoUS. 


both expressions: rTofs dorpa- 
Tevro.s, Tots Aurovo. THY Tas. 
The punishment for dorparela 
appears to have been dariula 
only, of a very stringent cha- 
racter especially as regards ex- 
clusion from sacred rites, but 
without a fine. In the passage 
of Andoc. de Myst. § 74, already 
cited § 60 n., dorparela is joined 
with xdxwots yovéwy as coming 
under the same rule of Atimia. 
For the ceremonial exclusion 
compare the preceding note on 
els THY dryopay éuBaddev, and add 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 176 6 pév roivov 
vowobérns Tov dor parevrov Kal Tov 
Aurévra THY rag eo TY Tepip- 
pavrnplwy Hs aryopas ééelpyer. 
The two speeches of Lysias 
against the younger Alcibiades 
are entitled \uroratiov and a- 
orparelas respectively : and the 
law of military offences is dis- 
cussed with reference to these 
by Prof. Jebb, Att. Or. 1. 256 ff. 

Kal Te TOY euril Tots émirijmots 
mown] Cf. Aeschin, Timarch. 
§ 164, cited in the last note but 
one. The Atimos, trespassing 
upon the preserves of the full 
citizens, laid himself open to 


évderéts (above § 50) and might 
even be punished capitally (An- 
drot. § 48 n.). 

TH Karaoracet Ta éyyunror] 
‘by the putting in of bail,’ 
Hitherto we have had only the 
verb xafiordva. 

§ 104. goprixwrepov] De- 
mosth. might well apologise for 
‘vulgarity’ here, as he does de 
Pace p. 57 § 4 otrws ryoduac 
goptixov Kal éraxOes wore dvay- 
knv ovcav op&y éuws amoKve, 
Mr Whiston in a note on the 
latter passage suggests that 
goptrixos in this sense ‘ origin- 
ally meant and expressed the 
characteristics of porters and 
low fellows employed in carry- 
ing burdens.’ But in that case 
the termination -cxds, expressive 
of aptitude, must have been 
attached to a verbal root. In 
reality what is coarse and vulgar 
is Poptixov Kal éraxbes, apt to 
be a burden and a nuisance to 
more refined natures. 

ovK dmrorpéoun] § ln. The 
variant dmoxpiWoua: has here 
scarcely any support from the 
MSS. 


avayvobs 733 


172 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


[$ 105. 


NOMOI KAOTIHS, KAKOSEOQ> TONEON, 
ASTPATEIAS. 
["O te dv tis amonréon, éav pev avTO AABN, THY 
durraciav Katadixaber, éav O€ un, THY SexaTTAAclav 


§ 105. NOMOY] The autho- 
rity of these ‘laws’ does not as 
a whole stand higher than that of 
other similar documents already 
considered: though they contain 
some genuine phrases not de- 
rived from the context. One thing 
is clear, that they could never 
have stood together as portions 
of a single law: such subjects 
as Kdxwots yovéwy and dorpareta 
could not have been introduced 
parenthetically in the midst of 
the véuoc kXNorw7js. Benseler fur- 
ther points out that dexarddcrov 
is ‘unheard-of’, and contra- 
dicted by § 114, where the two- 
fold restitution is alone men- 
tioned (see further in the note 
below): it must be a mistake of 
the compiler, who was thinking 
of the tenfold penalty in cases 
of sacrilege (cf. § 83), Besides 
this, mpoorimicba rdov Bovdé- 
bevov, ‘any one may propose 
the additional penalty’, is a 
very confused mode of expres- 
sion in the text of a law: and 
HAwkws first means ‘arrested’ 
(ertappt) and then is followed 
by éay & GA@, ‘if he be found 
guilty.’ I do not follow Ben- 
seler in his objections to mpds 
Trois émairios and 6 Boudduevos 
ois €ecrw: but the above are 
surely enough to determine the 
character of the document. 

AdBy] Here equivalent to d7ro- 
AdBy, ‘recover’: a sense of the 
word for which there does not 
seem to be any classical autho- 
rity. 


Tiv dirdaclay ' Karadixagew] 
sc. Tod kXérTov, ‘ the court shall 
sentence the thief to pay the 
double value’: but this highly 
condensed expression is much 
more like the abstract of a law 
than,the law itself. On the 
infinitive in enacting clauses, 
above § 20 n. 

Tiv Sexardaclav] Heraldus 
the old commentator on Petit’s 
Leges Atticae saw the absurdity 
of this, and proposed diurdaclar : 
it is only surprising that mo- 
dern scholars like Meier, Plat- 
ner,and Schoemann should have 
failed to see it. H. Schelling 
de Solonis legibus, followed by 
Dindorf and Whiston, gives the 
reasons for the change. (1) 
There is no due proportion be- 
tween the twofold restitution 
when the thing stolen was re- 
covered, and the tenfold, in 
addition to other punishment 
(xpos rots éra:riows) when it was 
not. (2) Aulus Gellius (rx. 18) 
observes: ‘Solon sua lege in 
fures non (ut antea Dracon) 
mortis, sed dupli poena vindi- 
candum existimavit.’ (3) It is 
implicitly contradicted by the 
orator himself in § 114, Mr 
Whiston further shows that the 
Roman law was in general con- 
tented with a twofold penalty: 
and so, it may be added, was 
the Hebrew (Exod. xxii. 1—9, 
with some exceptions as in v. 1). 
The matter is simple enough 
when it is once admitted that 
we are not correcting the text 


P, 733. | 


mpos Tois émravtious. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


173 


dedécOar S ev TH TrodoKkaxKy 


. \ , / p:- € / \ , 7 2\ 
Tov Toda TréVvO NMEpaS KAL VUKTAS loas, €aV TPOOTt- 


pHon 7 HrALala. 


OTav Tepl TOD TLYLNMLATOS 7). 


mpootipacbar dé Tov Bovdouevor, 


>\ / > a a 
éav 5€ Tis atrayOn TOV 


¢ \ x > 
yovéwy KaKdoEwS NLOKWS ) AoTpaTElas, }* TpoELpN- 
4 70m. Zcum F, 


of our author, but the mistake 
-of a grammarian, and that the 
origin of his mistake is clear,viz. 
a confusion with the case of 
sacrilege in § 82. 

mpos Tots émraitiows] Ta pmévTot 
TpooTiujuata Vorwy éralria xa- 
Ae? Pollux vii. 22. @ore pwév 
Twa év Tots vouots wpiouéva KaTa 
Tov dodiKoWvTWwY, WoTEep 7H éTrw- 
Bera map’ "Ioalw ev TG Kata 
Acoxdéous’ ore 5é kal dAXa & mpoc- 
TyWatar Td Sikacrhpiov, ws delK- 
vuot Anuocbévns év rH kara Ti- 
poxparouvs Harpocrat. s.v. Cf. 
note on Trav mpooriymnudarur § 2. 

dedéoOar 8 év TH modoKdkKy 
tov 766a] The law-compiler is 
here at one with the orator 
(§ 114) as to the fact that the 
mpooriunua in cases of theft 
was limited to five days’ im- 
prisonment, involving the shame 
of public exposure (d7rws dp@ev 
amravres avroyv Sedeuévov), while 
the infliction of it was left to 
the discretion of the court (7:- 
phoa & éfeivar TY Sixacrnply). 
But instead of decudv he has 
the expression in the text, which 
he got from a genuine law of 
Solon preserved by Lys. ec. 
Theomn,. § 16. In this curious 
passage Lysias explains: 7» dé 
modoxaxkn Tavré [surely it should 
be ra’rév] éoriw, & Ocdurnore, 8 
vov kadeirat év TO EVAW SedécOa : 
and gives as further examples 
of archaic words in the old 
laws, émvopxeitv in the sense of 
duvivar, Spackdatew = dmrodidpa- 
oKxew, amid\ev=aroxrelev, ap- 


ybpov oraciuov for money bear- 
ing interest, mrepacuévws=da- 
vep@s, Todeicbar = Badl few, oixeds 
=Oeparwy, rodda 5é Toadra Kal 
adda éoriv, he adds. The Scho- 
liast here discusses two etymo- 
logies for rodoxaxxy: 7Tot mapeu- 
BeBXnuévov tod érépov x mwoddv 
Tis KaKWoLS odoa, 7} KaT& oVYKO- 
wiv, ws Alduuos, olov rodoxaroyn. 
The former is favoured by L. 
and §.: the latter is most pro- 
bably right. 

bray mepi rod Tyshparos Ff] 
‘when the question of a penal 
sentence is before the court.’ 

éav 5é Tis drax0y] So far as 
the writer understood what he 
was saying, he was evidently 
thinking of the draywyy in its 
technical sense of summary 
arrest (Androt. § 26n.). But 
in fact the different stages of 
the process are hopelessly con- 
fused: 7\wkws ‘arrested’ might 
perhaps be justified by Androt. 
§ 53 ro oma ddods els Td decuw- 
Thpiov EXxecOa, if it were not 
followed by édv & a\@ in the 
more usual sense. 

 wpoeipnuévor] ‘or for enter- 
ing where he has no business 
to enter after notice of exclu- 
sion from legal privileges,’ i.e. 
especially from the Agora and 
from sacred rites, § 103 n.—réyp 
vonov should of course be rp 
vouluwy, as Salmasius and others 
after him have pointed out: 
but it is not necessary to cor- 
rect this grammarian’s Greek. 


174 KATA TIMOKPATOTS®. [§§ 105-108. 


/ oA n / 7 ? A wa , \ 
pévov avT@ THV vopov cipyer Oat Elovwv OTOL mn XP1), 
\ 
Snodvtwy avTov of &vdexa Kal cicayovTwy eis THY 
¢ U 
nriaiav, KaTnyopelTw dé 6 BovAdpevos ols eEeatuv. 
>\ ~ Ss 6 , ¢ Oe \ be? ae 
édv S ade, TisaT@ 7 ndLala 6 TL yp) Tabeiv avToV 
a > a +X > > U n / 4 
 arotica. éav 8 apyvpiov tinh, dedécOw Ews 
av éxtion.| 
S Y > a“ 
“Opords ye, ov yap"; & dvdpes ’AOnvaior, Yorov 
¢ / 
vopnobérns Kai Tiywoxpatns. 0 wév ye Kal Tovs dvTas 
/ a \ \ r, ” Be \ 
BeXtiovs trout Kal Tovs pédXXOVTAS EcecIar’ O Oé Kat 
a a / \ / / 
Tots yeyevnuevols Trovnpois, 6mws pu Swcover SiKyy, 
a / U t 
odov Seixvuct, Kab Tols ovow OTas aAdeLa yevnoeTaL 


106 


a RR \ lal I ” \ 
Kaxoupyel evpicKet, Kal Tols wéAdovoW EcecOan, TOVS 
Lal f rf 
é& dmdvTwy TOV yXpovweY ToVNpoUS, OTwS EcoVTAL T@ 


¥ ov yap; om. Z Bekk. Bens. v. not. 


elcayévTwv] § 10n.—o Bovdé- 
pevos ols €ZeoTw] § 18 n. 

madeivy 7 adrorica] § 63 n. 

édy & dpyuplov tyunOq] §§ 39, 
63 n., 103. 

§ 106. “Opoids ye, od yap3] 
See various readings. The in- 
sertion of od ydp rests on a 
marginal note in = (Aelme: ov 
ydp;): on Aristides rx. p. 359 
ed. Walz: and on a parallel 
passage in Androt. § 73. For 
the comparison with Solon, 
§ 103 n. 

Tots yeyevnpévols...TOts obo... 
Tots wéAXovor] Past, present, and 
future criminals are all brought 
in to swell the indictment 
against the obnoxious law. 

‘¢¢] Dindorf alone corrects 
thus for the oo of MSS. and 
editions ; and he is undoubtedly 
right. The Attics wrote this 
word consistently as a mono- 
syllable: and though the ten- 
dency of copyists was, as usual, 
to obliterate such forms in fa- 


vour of the common Greek Gos, 
they have occasionally survived 
in the best MSS. (cf. Cobet, 
Nov. Lect. p. 418), Thus in 
Plat. Critias 111c editors now 
read, after Bekker, o@ for oda 
from one good MS. Dindorf 
has restored oa in de Cor. Trie- 
rarch. p. 1231 § 10, but has left 
oGa in c. Everg. et Mnesib. p. 
1145 § 20: perhaps on the 
ground that the latter speech is 
not by Demosthenes. There 
does not appear to be another 
example of the nom. plur in the 
orators: but the acc. plur. ods 
for owovs is preserved in several 
passages, e.g. de Pace p. 61 § 17, 
de Cherson. p. 93 § 16, de F. L. 
p. 364 § 75 (=84 Shilleto, who 
makes noremark. In the two 
former of these passages it is 
inadvertently described in L.and 
S. as nom, plur.). Zdéy as neu- 
ter sing. = gov is found in near- 
ly all MSS. c. Lept. p. 500 
§ 142, and as accus. fem.=cdav 


P. 734] KATA TIMOKPATOT2. 175 


/ / Y Se Se: 
107 Kal pndev Telcovtat, TapacKevdlwv. Katou tiv’ av 
\ , > 
akiav Soins Sixny } ti od Tabdy av Ta TpocHKoVT 
¢ \ a 
elns memrovOds, Os, TA bev AdAXa &d, GAXA TOS TO 
€ a , / 
ynpa BonBors Avpaiver, of Kai Cavtas avayKxafover 
% a vA / \ > / 
ToUvs Traioas TovS yovéas Tpédetv, Kal everday atroOa- 
/ / / 
voow, OTws TOV vopllomévwv TUYwoL, TapacKevatov- 
x an ’ / e U > / / 
ow; i Tes ov KaKLoTOS aTavTwY avOpeéTrer Sikaias 734 
/ 
av vopifo.o, OoTls, ® KaTapate, Tepl TAciovos dalver 
Tovs KAéTTAS Kal TOvs KaKOUpyous Kal TOvs aoTpa- 
a \ / 
TevUToUS THS TaTpidos TroLvovmevos, Kat Sua TovTOUS 
y € lal / fa) 8. 
Kal’ nue@v vopov TiOns® ; 
Uy / c An A. 5€ , b) b] a n 
BovaAopac tolvur viv, & vrecxounv év apyy Tod 
, > / 
Adyou, atodoyicacOa TeToinKoTa éuavTov. é&dnv 
\ 4 v a 
yap avroy é&edéyEew kata mwavtTa évoyov dvTa TH 
lal \ f fal 
ypab), Tp@Tov mev Tapa Tos vosovs vomoleTodvTA, 
ta) > t / 
Sevtepov 5é vrevaytia Tots ovat vopois yeypadota, 


108 


® riOeis Cobet N. L. p. 699, 


in a respectable minority c. 
Mid, p. 572 § 177. The mono- 
syllabic forms are well attested 
in Attic verse, where the metre 
has often preserved them from 
corruption: ods Soph. Oed, Col. 
1210, Eur. Cycl. 294 (in the 
latter passage feminine): o@ 
neut. plur. id. fr. 762 Dind., 
ov Aristoph. Lysistr. 488. 

§ 107. rods TE yhpa BonPods] 
Of course vdéuouvs is meant, but 
it is not necessary to insert the 
word either before or after )v- 
pave, as has been proposed. 

brws tTUxwo.] In the last § 
we had S7ws three times follow- 
ed by a future: but no one pro- 
poses here to read érws rev- 
fovra. The rule is, I believe, 
correctly stated on Plat. Protag. 
3130, that érws should not be 
joined to an aorist ‘ of the same 


form as the future,’ 

§§ 108, 109. A short reca- 
pitulation of the points already 
proved against the law of Ti- 
mocrates: he did not comply 
with the rules which forbid 
hasty legislation (§§ 24—27), 
nor begin by repealing contra- 
dictory laws (§§ 32—38). As to 
the bad consequences of the 
law, the speaker need not re- 
mind his hearers of what he 
has only just done saying. 

§ 108. drodroylicacAa] This 
reading for dro\oyjoacGa rests 
only on one corrected MS., but 
is well supported by gramma- 
rians and required by the sense: 
‘to recapitulate.’ Anecd. Bekk. 
p. 430, 15. ’Arodroylcac0a:— 
TO émezeNOeitv Exacta. Zonaras 
p. 266 gives the same gloss, and 
adds: otrw Anuocbérns. 


176 


109 


Ito 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 108—111. 


° \ ’ nr 
tpitov dé roadTa Oo dv Brame THY TOALY. OvVKODY 
‘\ a 
HKOVTATE TOV VOMOV, A KeAXEVOVEL ToLelv TOV TLOEVTA 
/ ee \ ! FoR 20/7 7 , 
vomov Kawwov' Kat Tadw vuds édidaka OTL TovToV 
>] nr & » > f. 
ovo OTLody érroinoev ovTOS. Kal pnV KaKElV@V NKOVETE 
a t git ' AN > l 3158 0 J 
TOV vouwv ois évavtios av édaiveD Oo TovTOU' Kal 
ToUTOUS OTL Tply AVoaL TOvde TéOELKEY éerriatac Ge. 
> A ‘ ¢ > >] b] / 3 / é wv \ 
GAG pny OTL y OvK erriTHSEL0S, aKNKOATE’ apTL yap 
Aéyor erravedunv. ovKodY KaTa TaVT adiKel pave- 
, ’ f > \ 
p@s, Kal ovdev Eo 6 TL hpovticas ovd evAaBnOeis 
/ > ey A mer xX > \ Ud Vv 
haivetat, adr’ ewouye Sokel, KaV El TPOS TOUVTOLS GAXO 
TL pr) Trovelv éyéypatrro ev Tos OvGL VOmoLS, KAY TOUTO 
TOO AL. 
A ef A 3 
Ilavrayobev pév tolvuv djr0s €oO OTL TAVT 
la / 
éyparpev éruBovrevoas, kal* wera Tod Bovdevoac Oat 


t kai om. Bens. cum 2FYTOQ r. 


roatdra] Like wsevartia, is 
governed by yeypagdra. 

a@ KxeXevovor] ‘what they re- 
quire a man proposing a new 
law to do.’ K. 

§ 109. ovxody kard mavr’] ‘In 
every way therefore it is plain 
that he has done wrong, in 
everything has he been reck- 
less and unscrupulous.’ So K.: 
we may translate the last clause 
more literally, ‘he has clearly 
shown no care or caution.’ 

kav el mpos Tovros] ‘Hven if 
(cat ei) there had been a further 
prohibition in the existing laws 
against doing anything else, he 
would have done this also (xal 
TovTo twounoa dv)’: for the mere 
pleasure of breaking the law it 
would seem. The first dy serves 
merely to prepare the mind for 
the conditional character of the 
sentence, and like the second is 
referred to mojom. See Jelf, 
§§ 430, 432, and a note on 


Plat. Protag. 3118. 

§ 110. On the question of 
interpolation in this part of the 
Speech, see the Introduction. 

§§ 110—121. Timocrates, who 
had not hitherto, when himself 
a tax-gatherer, shown any com- 
passion for the burdens of the 
poor, has now suddenly come 
out as a humanitarian and phi- 
lanthropist : only he selects the 
least deserving as the objects of 
his sympathy. 

§ 110. The law is all of a 
piece, and never once right by 
accident : everything is of malice 
prepense, nothing through error 
of judgment. 

ériBourevoas ... BovlevoacOar] 
The compound expresses the 
sinister intent (é7i rw against 
or to the injury of some one): 
the simple verb the deliberate- 
ness of the act, opp. to yvauns 
diawaprovw. The repetition of 
émiBour. and Bovd. inelegant at 


IIitl 


P. 735.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 177 


fa) > al > 4 
TavT adel’ Kal ov yvoun Stauaptov, wadiota S 
a / / al 
éx Tov TWavTa TOY VvomoY péypL THS VaTAaTNS TUAXA- 
aot: a ? IO\ \ > 
$ TOLOUTOV ElvaL’ OVE yap ovd aKawv ovdéev EOnKeEv 
| 
’ A >O9 ¢ L ae »” fal 
opOas éxov, 00S ws vuiv Euehr€ AvOLTEAH TEL. TOS 
oUY OUK €iKOS puLcely Kal TLw@petcbar TodTOV baTLS 
a \ 8 / Py / bd S, ©) Sag de a 
Tov pev Snwouv HouKnévov NuéAnNoev, UTép Sé TOV 
Uf > 2 
ROLKNKOT@Y Kal VaTEpov adiKnodYTw@Y ToOv’s VdpoUS 
% > wv An 
€Oncev ; Oavpato &, & advdpes Sixactatl, THs avaidelas 
a / 4 ] ‘ > 
QvTOU TO, NViKa pev ev autos wet Avdpotiwvos 
? 
nr \ a“ / A ¢ 
Tov €deov TOUTOY él TH TANOEL TO VEeTEpwH fun TroLN- 


VY dduxecvy Bens, cum =F et corr. v. 


best becomes absolutely insuf- 
ferable if the two verbs are to 
be put in the same clause; but 
Benseler ‘auf allen Vieren’ be- 
fore = has printed ém:Bovdevoas 
pera TOD BovrevoacOa Tair’ ad:- 
Kelv. 

ovde yap—éxor] ‘for not even 
unwittingly (rather than unwil- 
lingly) did he insert any right 
provision’ (into this law, as the 
aor. €@nxe shows: not of the 
whole course of his career as a 
legislator). 

Shou Hoixnuévov] The ‘ wrongs 
of the people’ probably in- 
clude both oppression of the 
poor and frauds on the public 
treasury. 

kal Vorepor adixycdvTwr] ‘past 
and future criminals’ ‘ friiherer 
und kiinftiger verbrecher,’ Ben- 
seler. This is also R. W.’s ren- 
dering, and it is more in ac- 
cordance with § 106 than K.’s 
‘who had already done wrong 
and intend to do it again.’ 

§ 111. Contrast of his former 
and present conduct. 

Oavpdiw &] The common 
phrase davudjew re rwés (Jelf 
Synt. § 495, Madvig, Synt. § 
61'b) is here refined upon; the 


W. D. 


construction is Pavudtw rijs dvat- 
delas (avTov) TO wh morjoacba 
(EXeov), Oetvac 5é (Tdv védpor). 
‘ The point about his impudence 
that most astonishes me is this, 
that though when he was him- 
self the colleague of Androtion 
he’...‘ yet when’... 

qvuixa péev Apxev adrds] The 
office is that of éxdoyeds, from 
which Androtion had ousted 
Euctemon and taken his place, 
Androt. § 48, where see the 
notes. 

Tov €\eov ToUToOY—un Torhoa- 
ca] ‘he did not feel this com- 
passion for the mass of you 
citizens.’ I am not aware of 
another instance of é\eov zrote?- 
c0at=édeetvy, but the case comes 
under the rule broadly stated 
by Shilleto (on F. L. p. 370 
§ 103 dgynv moretcOa), that 
‘any verb in Greek may be 
resolved into the cognate sub- 
stantive with zoetcOa.’ In 
Mid. p. 582 § 212 wap’ airay 
Tas xdpiras Tmo@vra is some- 
thing more than a mere peri- 
phrasis for xaplfwvrac: it means 
rather ‘that they may make 
their presents at their own ex- 
pense, when they think proper 


12 


73 


wi 


I12 


178 


KATA TIMOKPATOYTS. [8$111, 112. 


ees. / \e¢ n A > > / 
cacbat, TO aTreipynKoTs Ta EavTOD YphpaT etadépov- 
\ 7 > \ 
TL, ereton © Avdpotiova ee. & marae Vhynpynto TIS 
/ / ‘a val \ \ e \ \ 8 v4 
mTovEws Ypnpata KaTaletvar, Ta pév iepa, Ta 8 bora, 
a \ / > ‘ A 
Tote Ocivat TOV vomov ér aTrooTepnoel TOY bev Oolov 


THs OuTAacias, TOY lepav Sé THs SexaTAacias. 


\ 
Kat 


7 \ \ tal \ 
oUT® mTpos TO TAHOOS TO vVpéTEpOY TpocEVnVEKTAL 
> . ¢ \ an 
6 avTixa para virép Tod Snpwov dyowv Tov vopov 


toutov OGetvat. 


duxaiws 8 av épot Soxet rrabeiv 


¢ nr f v a 
oTiodv, CoTis oletar Seiv, ei pév TLS ayopavopos 7 


to make them.’ Cf. Androt. 
§ 45 n. on wap éavrod. There 
is plausibility in Sauppe’s con- 
jecture rovrw applying to the 
two men: = To’rar, F Tod- 
TOV. 

T@ amerpnxdTi—elo pépovTi] ‘ex- 
hausted with contributing its 
own monies,’ as R. W. The 
participle is rather unusual for 
T@ ecicbépev: cf. Bremi on 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 10. 

ére.d7) 6 Avdporiwva] ‘yet when 
A. had to pay the sums which 
he had long ago filched from 
the state...he (T.) proposed his 
law with the object of defraud- 
ing you’ &c. 

Tov wev doluv...rav iepwv de] 
Here we have doubtless (and 
more clearly put than in § 83) 
the real provisions of the Athe- 
nian law of forfeitures, which we 
have seen confused by the law- 
compiler in § 105. G. H. Schae- 
fer calls attention to the varied 
order of pw2v and 6é. 

mpocevnvextat] The phrase 
mpuopépecbar mpds tia ‘to be- 
have towards a person’ is com- 
mon enough in Attic prose (cf. 
Paley and Sandys on Boeot. de 
Dot. p. 1020 § 40): the perf. 
pass. in this sense is rare, and 
perhaps unexampled. We have, 
however, in 1. Aphob. p. 814 


§ 4 unrépa revrjxovTa pas els 
Tov olkov eicevnveyuéev nv. 

aurika pdda] avrixa by wdda 
Fy. ef. Androt. § 65 n. 

§ 112. Cruel inconsistency of 
T.’s treatment of poor and rich 
defaulters. 

dyopayouos] On these ‘clerks 
of the market’ see Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. Agoranomi. Caillemer in 
Daremberg and Saglios. v. gives 
the same facts, with the ad- 
dition of a list of states proved 
by inscriptions lately discovered 
to have had public officers with 
the same name. That they 
were & K\npwrh apxn rests on 
the present passage and is 
highly probable in itself: but 
the generally accepted state- 
ment that they carried whips, 
though with the proviso that 
their power of summary chas- 
tisement was limited to foreign- 
ers and slaves, seems to me im- 
probable, as unlike what we 
know of Athenian police re- 
gulations. The Scholiast in- 
deed on Aristoph. Ach, 724 says 
TO yap waaov ppayyédas Erv- 
mrov ol Noy.oral rods THs ayopas, 
having previously explained dyo- 
pavdmous as ods viv Noyiords Ka- 
ovuev. But he probably took 
his author’s fun too literally; 
Dicaeopolis in the play says 


P. 735.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


179 


ATTUVOLOS 7) OiKATTIS KATA OI}jwouS yevomeEvos KAOTHS 
3 a ow, We x » , Vs / 
év Ttais evOvvais HrAwKer*, dvVOpwros Tévys Kal idvoTNS 


x éddwxev omnes praeter Dindorfium. v. not. § T7 


that in his model market the 
poor Megarians and the foreign- 
ers are to have free trade with 
him, not with Lamachus and the 
war-party, and three whips are 
to be dyopavduot and keep off 
cuxopdavra and ‘birds of a like 
feather’ (daciavol). A Byzan- 
tine writer, who lived when 
degrading punishments were the 
rule, could not understand the 
sense of personal dignity of 
the old Athenians who, like 
modern Frenchmen, could tole- 
rate shooting a soldier but not 
flogging him. Plato’s enact- 
ment of corporal punishment 
for cheating in the market (7)y- 
yats pev kal deopots doddov Kal 
éévov, Laws vi. 764 B) can 
hardly be accepted as genuine 
Attic legislation in the face of 
the absurdly minute provisions 
of vir, 849—50, and the rule 
of a stripe for every drachma’s 
worth in cases of adulteration 
x1. 917 p, which is simply what 
he would like to prescribe in 
order to teach his citizens 
honesty. Schoemann in his 
latest work gives full details as 
to the Agoranomi, but makes 
no mention as to the whips 
(Antiq. p. 416). Pollux x. 177 
describes the Kia as @ wooden 
collar @ Tov avxeva. évdevra eee 
parruyova bau Tov tepl THY ayopay 
kaxoupyourra. It is impossible 
to believe that this punishment 
was inflicted on free Athenians. 

We learn from Lys. Or. 22 
§ 16 that the dyopavduoe had no 
control over the sale of corn, 
for which the o:rogddakes were 
appointed, 

aoruvomos] ‘overseers of the 


streets,’ charged with preserving 
order as well as cleanliness: 
Dict. Antigq. s.v. ‘Astynomi’ ; 
Schoemann, Antig. p. 416. Cail- 
lemer again gives a list of places 
where inscriptions bearing the 
name aoruvduo have been found 
(ap. Daremberg and Saglio, s.v.). 

dixacrhs Kara Sjuous}] These 
‘district judges’ are identified 
with the rerrapdxovra of De- 
mosth. c. Pantaen. p. 976 § 33, 
but are scarcely mentioned un- 
der either name except by 
the grammarians. Schoemann 
casts a doubt on the statement 
of the text that they were chosen 
by lot, Antiq. p. 473 m.: but 
one of his authorities, the Lexi- 
con Seguerianum, contradicts 
itself (pp. 306. 15 and 310, 21). 
His giving the number as sixty 
is apparently a slip: the texts 
agree that there were originally 
thirty, and that they were in- 
creased to forty after the ar- 
chonship of Eucleides, s.c. 403. 
On the other hand Schoemann 
has given the right explanation 
of the words aixia cal ra rév 
Bialwy in Pantaen. l.c. as ‘as- 
saults of minor importance,’ 
(So Teuffel in Pauly s.v. rec- 
capaxovra, ‘nichtpeinliche In- 
jurienklagen’), Kennedy cannot 
be right in including ‘ charges 
of rape,’ App. 1. p. 506. It is 
incredible that men whose ju- 
risdiction in small cases was 
limited to the value of ten drach- 
mas (Bagatellsachen, Teuffel l.c.) 
should have tried an offence, 
which the Athenian law, like 
the English, regarded as capital. 
Compare Dict. Antiq. s.v. Hoi 
Tettaraconta. 

12—2 


113 


180 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 112-114. 


Kal TONY aTrelpos Kai KANpwTIY apynyv ap~as, 
9S 

ToUT@ pev THY SexaTTAaclay civat, Kab Vomoy ovdéva 

Tois TovovTols émixovpodvta tliOnow' et Sé TWweS 

mpéaBes aipeOévtes v0 Tod Synpov, wrAOvVCLOL byTes, 

\ 

UpeiAovTO ypnuaTa ToAXA, Ta pEv lepd, TA SO dora, 
\ / 

Kal elyov ypovoy Todvy, ToUTOLS OT@S pNdév TeEicor- 

‘gp e e / /f? ® \ / 
Tat wnO wy of vopor wnP av Ta Wwndicpata Tpoc- 
’ / an 

TATTEL, MAN axpiB@s evpev. KaiToL y 6 Lorov, @ 

7 5 Py \ ® ove x A! T U / 

dvdpes Suxactal, @ ovd’ av avtos Tipoxparns dyoat 

5 / a 

Gmotos vomobérns eivat, ovX bTTws dodhadas KaKoUp- 

yyoovot haivetat TapacKkevalwy Tots ToLovTous, AAN 

A x \ b] / x , / > / \ 

Crws 7) pn) adixnoovow » Sdcovat dixny akiav, Kal 
/ / ’ 

vopov elonveyKev, eb pév Tis MeO” tuépav Umep TevTN- 


tiv Sexardaclavy] Demosth, 
of course takes an extreme case, 
as throughout the speech he 
strains every point against the 
defendant. It is not easy to 
see how any one of the oflicers 
just mentioned was likely to 
owe money to the temples. 

Orws pndev teicovrat... mar’ 
axpiBas evpev] ‘took great pains 
to provide that they should 
suffer none of the penalties,’ 
Observe the change of tense— 
Ti@now of his public life in 
general, evpev of this particular 
decree. 

§§ 113—116. Solon’s legis- 
lation contrasted with that of 
Timocrates. 

§ 113. 6 ZdrAwr] § 103 n. 
The form of this trite sarcasm 
is here varied. 

dioa Suoos}] We should ex- 
pect djceev, as in Androt, § 54, 
if only to avoid the hiatus: but 
Benseler has shown that this 
part of the speech from § 110 
exhibits much less than Demo- 
sthenes’ usual care on this point, 


Einl. p, 81. This need not 
prove that the disputed por- 
tions are not by him, but mere- 
ly, as Blass holds, that they had 
not received his final touches 
and were roughly put together, 
when perhaps the case had 
ceased to interest him. 

ovxX Orws—rots Toovros] The 
order of course is ov gaivera 
TapacKevagwy Tots Tovovrots dws 
acpadws Kakoupyjaover, ‘we do 
not see him (Androt. § 21 n.) 
providing for such persons the 
means of committing crime with 
impunity’: and the idiomatic 
use of ovx d67ws=non modo non, 
‘so far from,’ is here out of 
place, though it has misled some 
editors: cf. § 153 n. 

el pév Tis wel’ nuépav] On the 
vouot kowns cf. Androt. §§ 26, 
27, above § 105, with the notes, 
The three passages furnish the 
substance of the article ‘ Klopes 
Dike’ in Dict. Antig. As usual, 
the orator’s text is far clearer 
and more self-consistent than 
the compiled document of § 105. 


P. 736.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


181 


Kovta Spaypas KNeTTOL, aTraywynv pos Tovs Evdex’ 


eivat, eb O€ TLS VUKTMP OTLODY KAETTOL, TOUTOY e€eivaL 736 


lal - / ral 
Kal amoxteivas Kal Tpdcat SidKovtTa Kal drayayeiv 


lal / 
tois évdex’, ef BovrolTo. 


n , ¢ 
T® © aXOVTL OV ai atra- 


\ , 
ywyai elow, ovK éyyuntas KaTaoTnoavTL exTLoWW 


al b] A U 
II4 elvat TOV KAE“MATOV, AXA Oavatov THY Enuiav. Kab 


el tis of éx Avxeiov } €& "Axadnuelas 7 éx Kuvocap- 


It is a curious coincidence that 
the 50 drachmas which mark 
the limit between ordinary and 
aggravated cases should be al- 
most identical (in intrinsic 
value, not of course in pur- 
chasing power) with the 40 
shillings which until recently 
constituted a capital felony in 
English law. As regards the 
distinction between ped’ nudpay 
and vixrwp, the Athenians had 
the advantage over our (still 
existing) hard-and-fast rule of 
9 p.m. to 6 a.m. of having no 
clocks, and of being always able 
to see the natural phenomena 
of sunrise and sunset. 

Another distinction, that be- 
tween uel’ nuépay ‘by day’ and 
xa’ nuépay ‘ daily,’ might appear 
elementary: but in the scurri- 
lous passage of de Cor. p. 270 
§ 129 we have, as is well known, 
an instance of we?nmepwos ‘ diur- 
nus’ taking the place of xa@y- 
wepwos ‘ quotidianus.’ 

dmayayelv Tots €vdexa] Arare 
construction for mpds Tous évdexa: 
elsewhere we have dm. ws rods 
Gecuobéras c. Aristocr. p. 630 
§ 32, eis 7d deouwriprov ib. p. 647 
§ 80: or absolutely, Androt, 
§ 26 dwaye § 27 ris doeBelas drd- 
yew. The araywyh here in- 
tended can hardly be any other 
than the summary arrest at the 
risk of the prosecutor, the ex- 
istence of which has been main- 
tained on Androt. § 26, 


el BovNoro] ‘fat the option 
of the party’ K. It is amusing 
to see the Scholiast explaining 
to which of the parties this op- 
tion belonged. 

TQ 8 dddvri] ‘any one con- 
victed of the crimes for which 
these arrests are allowed’: the 
article marks off draywyal as a 
technical term. 

ovK éyyunTas KaTacTioarTi] 
Of course a sneer at Androtion 
and the others relieved by T.’s 
decree, as though they were on 
a level with common thieves. 
The construction is ov« évomo- 
Oérnoev or ovx eiwev (G, H. 
Schaefer): the infinitive would 
here require 7. 

§ 114. é« Avxelov] The three 
great public gymnasia of Athens 
were all without the fortifica- 
tions, but immediately adjoin- 
ing them. The Lyceum lay 
due east of the city: the Aca- 
demy to the N.W. just beyond 
the outer Cerameicus; the Cyno- 
sarges to the N.E. close to the 
foot of Mount Lycabettus, and 
a little to the N. of the Lyceum 
(see the map of Athens in Dict. 
Geogr. Vol.1. between pp. 272— 
3). As Benseler observes; the 
words é« yupvaclwy show that 
the smaller or private gymnasia 
were protected by the same laws 
as the three great ones. The 
principle, that crime for which 
there are especial facilities must 
be repressed by severer punish- 


182 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 114-116. 


3 / 

yous iuwattov 7) AnKVOcoy 7) aAdo TL havroTaTov 
) TOV’ oKEVaY TL TOV EK TOV Yupvaciwy VPéroLTO 
) éx TOV ALpévav, VTrép Séxa Spaypas, Kal TovTOLS 
Oavatov évopobérnoev eciva. thv Enulav., et 6€ TIS 
iSlav Sixnv KromHs ddoln, trdpyew pev ad’t@ Sivtra- 
idiav din TIS n, UTapYeW bh ¢ 

’ lal \ rn >] n ral 
clov atoTtioa TO TLYsnOev, TpoocTtimnoas © eFeivar TO 
Sixactnpio mpos TH apyupio Secpov TO KAETTY, 

e/ A " ’ 

mévO nwépas Kal vUKTAaS’, OTwS OPMEV ATrAaVTES AUTOV 


dedeuévov. 


Y 7 éx Tov Bens. cum ZTQr. 


ments, is not unknown to mo- 
dern legislation. 

iuariov] This is 4 réy Awro- 
durév amraywyh, ‘the Apagoge 
(in its technical sense) or sum- 
mary arrest which is the well- 
known punishment of clothes- 
stealers,’ of c. Conon. p. 1256 
§ 1, where see Sandys. 

oxevav] Here the ‘utensils’ 
of the gymnasia, of which the 
AnkvGcov or oil-cruet is taken as 
a sample, the ‘stores’ of the 
ports. Another familiar usage 
of rd cxedn is for the ‘ proper- 
ties’ of the theatre, including 
the dresses; as in y. 12 of the 
Frogs, and elsewhere in Aris- 
toph. 

trép déxa Spaxyuas] This sum 
marks the inferior limit of or- 
dinary theft, as 50 drachmas 
the superior: below it are the 
merely trifling offences of which 
alone, as we have seen, the card 
dnuous dtkacral could take cog- 
nisance. So English law for- 
merly divided robbery into petty 
larceny, grand larceny, and fe- 
lony. The best modern Edd., 
and K.’s translation, place a 
comma .at Awévwr, thus con- 
riecting the clause vumép déxa 
dpaxuas with both yuyvaciwv 


? J 
Kal TOUT@Y OAlyw TpOTEpoV yKOVGAaTE 


add ioas Z Bens. 


and Awévwv. This seems better 
than to punctuate at vdédoro 
and make the smallest thefts 
from the gymnasia capital felo- 
nies. Property in exposed situ- 
ations might be thought suffici- 
ently protected, if stealing it to 
the amount of ‘ordinary’ thefts 
were punished as ‘aggravated’ 
theft. 

iétay Sixnv] The safe remedy 
for the poor man, who could 
not afford 1000 drachmas in 
case of failure, in Androt. § 27: 
duxdfou Kors mwpos diatrynTHy, 
kal ov Kivduvevcers. 

Umdpxew ev adt@| ‘he should 
be required’: depending, like 
elvat preceding, upon évopobé- 
THOEV. 

TpooTiujoat...3pos Tw apyuply| 
A good instance of the proper 
and, as has been contended, 
the only meaning of mpoorimay, 
‘to impose an additional pe- 
nalty’: ef. §§ 2,103. The latter 
passage will also illustrate de- 
opov, for the more usual decpod. 

mwév0’ jyuépas kal vixras| See 
the various readings. In § 105 
the MSS. and Edd. give wixras 
icas without variation. 

drrws dpwev...dedeuévor] = dedé- 
ca. év TH modoKdkky Tov 7ébda, 


Ir5 


116 


P. 737.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 183 


a t ” ee , \i,./% \ + a 

TOV Vip“oVv. @eTo yap OEiv TOV YE Ta alaxpa Epya 
b f \ “A ig / / ’ , >’ 

épyalouevoy yu) & vdelreto povov amodovta amnh- 

nA f , e 

AayOat (TONAL yap av avT@ eddKovy oVTwW y’ ob 

/ it 

Krétrtas éoeoOat, eb wédrovev AaOovTes pev ELewv, WH 


Nabovtes S ata povov Katabncew & UdpeirovTo”), 


G\rNa Tadta péev SuTracia Katabetvar, SePévta Fé 
TpOS TOUT@ THO Tinmate év aicxvvyn Hon Env Tov 
GdXrov Biov. @rXr ov Timoxpatns, dAX bras aTAG 
pev, & Set Surdacta, KaTAaOncovalt TapecKevace, nd 
otioby © érritijutov Ectat TpOs TOUTOLS. Kal OUK a7é- 
xpnoev UTép TOV peANOVT@V aUT@ TadT abiKelD, 
Ml \ \ 7 wv 5 \ 26 / > 2 
ANNA Kal EL TLS GP NOLKNKWS® KEKOLATMEVOS HV, Ka 
an > an / ” b] v a \ 
TovuTov adyKev. Kaitor éywy @unv Seiv Tov vomobe- 
a \ n / ” e tad / 
TOUVTa TEpt TOV EAA VTMOV EcecOaL, ola Set ylyveE- 


® @pya om. Bekk. Jllud DTOr. 
> d Udeldovro om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum TTO. 


¢ add xai Z Bekk. Bens. cum libris plerisque omnibus. 


§ 105. Otherwise dedécAac would 
of course simply mean ‘to be 
put in prison.’ 

§ 115. 1a alcxpa épya] epya 
before épya¢éuevov might with 
equal probability be omitted, 
if genuine, or inserted, if absent. 
In such a case the authority of 
=., supported by other good 
MSS., goes a long way; and the 
devvéryns of the passage, most 
will think, is improved by the 
addition. 

amnrAdxOa] cf. AedAicAa, § 
60 n.: amadddéerae (or dandd\d- 
ferar?) § 85 n. 

TONNOl...... of xA\érra] ‘the 
thieves, he thought, would in 
that case (ovrw) be numerous 
enough’: preserving the force of 
the article in translation. As 
dy is never joined to a future 
infinitive, the construction is 
éddxow av, treating the sup- 


posed case as non-existent: cf. 
Jelf, Synt. § 424. 1. Madvig 
Synt. § 117. 

ef pédANoev...vpeldovro] ‘if 
they could keep their plunder 
when not found out, and being 
found out had only to refund it.’ 
So K. very nearly. 

émitivov]=émaitiov § 105, or 
the more usual rpooriunua. 

§ 116. aire] goes with aré- 
xpnoev, Tadra with ddcetvy, ‘he 
was not contented with acting 
thus unjustly.’ Cf. § 79 amé- 
xpnoev avTy. 

kexo\acpuévos nv] Not ‘had 
been punished (and was free),’ 
but ‘had been sentenced (and 
was now undergoing punish- 
ment),’ 

@unv] ‘I used to think,’ i.e. 
as K, ‘I always imagined’; not 
simply ‘I thought’ (aor.). 

ola dei] ‘what men’s actions 


737 


117 


184 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [S$§ 116-119. 


fal \ e ira 4 \ \ / ¢€ / 
cOat Kal ws Exacta eye, Kal TAS TYLwpias OTOLAS 
\ 3.09. sf / a a no 
Twas éb éxdotos Set Tois adixnpaciw eivat, Tepl 
U a n 
ToUTwY vouobeTeiv. ToT yap éoTe TO ep Amrace 
a ‘ , \ 
Tols ToNTALS KOLVOdS TovS Vvopwouvs TLOévat. TO OE 
\ n , 
Tept TOV YyEeyovoTwY TpaywaTwYy Vvomous ypadeLy ov 
vopmoberety éotiv, aA\XNa TOvs adiKodYTas owe. TKO- 
a > ¢ > a 
meitre &, ws adrnOn réyo, ex Twvdi. ef pev yap 
, , f ral , \ ? 
Evetnpov rw THY TOY Tapavoywwv ypadny, ovK av 
26 a ern ¢ T / 4 a 25 a 
€Onxe TovTOY Tov vomov 6 TrmoKpatns, ovd av édetTo 
PY 4 / a > 2 6a t x b] a 
 TOALS TOVTOV TOU VOos“ov, AAN eENpKEL AV avTOIS . 
> / , a b4 
aTEcTEPNKOTL THY TOMY TA YpnwaTa TOV adrov 
\ / a ove eae | / \ \ ¢ , 
pn hpovtiferv. viv 8, émevd) atréduye, TO wev vpeTeE- 
a a \ 
pov dSoypa Kxal tHv Tod Sixactyplov Whpov Kat Tovs 
v / 9. f ” lal 5 CAA \ 
G@Xovs vopmovs axvpous oletat Setv eivat, avTov Sé Kal 


\ c a , , / 3 4 e 
118 TOV AUTOU VO Mov KUpLOV. KQaLTOl, @ Tipoxpates, Ol 


should be, and how everything 
should be regulated.’ R. W. 
Tas Tiuwplas drolas Twas is More 
forcible as well as more elegant 
than émolas twas Tas Tiuwplas 
(exquisitior verborum ordo, G. 
H. Schaefer): and epi rovrwv 
is merely an emphatic repeti- 
tion (epanalepsis) of wept rév 
pedAbvTwr écecOat. 

Kowvovs Tovs vomous TLPévac] * to 
enact the laws impartially’: 
like zoAXol...of kAémrac in the 
last section. 

§§ 117—119. Real motives 
of Timocrates: Attic law gives 
large discretionary powers to 
juries in awarding punishment : 
Timocrates would deprive them 
of these powers for the benejit 
of the vilest criminals, 

§ 117. ef pév yap Bixrjpwv 
jw] His decree is described 
§ 13, and again referred to in 
§ 101: the unsuccessful im- 


peachment of it, § 14. : 

ov dv éde?ro] ‘the state would 
not have wanted the law: a 
smart way of saying that T. 
and his friends would never 
have found out that it was 
wanted: ‘they would have been 
content, after robbing the state 
of its money, to let everything 
else alone.’ 

amépuye] The subject is here 
Euctemon: in § 14 it was Euc- 
temon’s law (kara Tov’s vdmous 
Z5oiev elpnoOar Kal awépvye). 
That of oterac is of course Ti- 
mocrates. 

vuétepov Séyua] The jury are 
once more identified with the 
Ecclesia which passed Eucte- 
mon’s decree (cf. §§ 11, 16): 
the ‘verdict of the court’ will 
include both the acquittal of 
Euctemon and the condemna- 
tion of Androtion and his col- 
leagues. 


11g 


P. 737.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 185 


lal lal , 
mev OVTES Nuiv KUPLOL VOMoL TOVTOVGL TrOLOvGL KUploUs 
: fal e tal lf 
amdvtov, Kal dudoacw avtois axovoacwy, OTotov av 
, \ an ? la 
TL vomitwor TO GdiKknpa, TOLAVTH Tepl TOD NOdiKNKOTOS 
> na , U \ al e/ 
xpnoGat TH Opyn, méya meyady, piKpov puiKpa. OTav 
A 5 ¢ \ a vga: al \d an + SE," , 
yap 9 6 te xp madeiv 7 atrotical, T0° Tidy emt Tov- 
rn a \ 
ToLs ylyvetas. ov Tolvuy TO Tabciv adaspets Tov Se- 
a / an / an e 
opmov aduels’ Kal TadTa Tict ; Tots KNETTALS, Tots Lepo- 
, an al ’ / a ’ 
ovAoLS, TOs TaTpadolats, Tois avdpopovats, Tots acTpa- 
lal fa) t U 
TEVTOLS, TOIS ALTTOUGL Tas TaEELS’ TOUTOUS yap TraVvTAasS 
, an / / ¢ > / 
oodles TO vomm. KaiTot dots év Onuoxpatia vomobe- 
4 76 om. Bens. cum pr. =. 


§ 118. xKdépiot véduo...rovrovel brav yap m 6 te xph] The 


...kupious] Forcibly contrasted 
with avrdv dé Kal rov avrod 
vépov xiptov above. T. claims 
that his law and his personal 
will shall prevail: instead of 
that, it is the existing laws 
(vres=Kelwevor) which are con- 
stitutionally in force, and they 
give the control of everything 
to the jury. 

kal Gddaow ... pxpdy pupa] 
‘and empower them, after hear- 
ing the case, to deal more or 
less rigorously with the offender 
according to the character (in 
their opinion) of his offence.’ 
So K., and a literal rendering is 
hardly possible, According to 
the common punctuation, the 
construction of péya peydrn, 
fukpov puxpgd must be supplied 
from dmotov av Tt voulfwor 7d 
adiknua, and is equivalent to 
éavy pev péya voulfwor, meyddy 
(xpiicOar 7H dpyn) éav 5é puxpdr, 
puxpg@. Another pointing is fa- 
voured by Bekker and Benseler: 
péya; meyady, mikpdy; puxpa. ‘Is 
it great? then (their anger is 
great,’) &c. This seems to me 
too jerky for Demosthenes’ 
style, 


reading of the best MSS.; ‘for 
when the question is what pe- 
nalty, corporal or pecuniary, is 
to be imposed, the assessment 
of it is vested in the jury.’ The 
older reading, é6ray yap 9 7d rt 
xp)... would mean ‘when the 
expression (or formula) occurs.’ 

mwadeiv 7 dmworica, §§ 63 n., 
105. 

§ 119. 7d mabeiv adacpers] 
You take away the mwaGeivy, and 
leave only the dmorica, which 
is not enough. 

Tots KAémrais k.7.A.] We have 
had this fallacy once already, 
§ 102 ff., where see notes. I 
think it unlikely that Demosth. 
should have reiterated so bad 
an argument, though he may 
have used it once: an additional 
reason for suspecting inter- 
polation in this part of the 
speech, 

Tos aorparevro.s, Tois Aurrovct 
ras tdfes} On this distinction 
see § 103 n. The MSS. are 
pretty equally divided between 
Aelrover and Arroiar: the present 
participle, which is also the 
reading of 2, seems more suit- 
able, 


186 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 119-122. 


lal fp ¢ \ a e fal , b SEs \ fal / al 
Tov uno virép TOV Lepav uO dep Tod Synuov vopoberei, 
> : Me 3 \ », 2 > ¥ a > , > a 
QX\X VUITEp WY ELTTOV APTiWS, TMS OU Sikatos €oTt THS 


120 €oyarns Timwpias Tuxelv ; ov yap 52) épel ye ws Tovs 738 


, I] 
ToLoUTOUS ov Kab TpoonKEL Kal of VomoL KEAEVOVEL 
a > id e 
Tais peyioTass Tiwplats evoxyous Eivat, oVd WS OUTOL, 


¢ \ e t/ \ / 5] \ , e U 
UTEP WY EUPNKE TOV VOMOV, OV KaL KAETTTAL Kal lepocu- 


\ a a \ 
Nol efor, TA pev lepa, Tas Sexatas THS Yeod Kal Tas 


\ io ” al , {23 \ 

TEVTNKOTTAS TOV AAXOV Dewy, TETUANKOTES KAL AVTE 
nr a b] ” / / 

Tov admobodvat avTol ExovTes, TA O Gala, a EyiyvEeToO 


UpeTEepa, KEKAOPoTes. 


Siahépes 5é TtocodTov avTav 


ee , a ” oA \ b) \ + he ee, eee 
lepogvuAla TMV GAAWY, OTL TY apYnVY OVE aVNVEY- 
: / 


was ob Sixads éott] was ovdxi 
Sixalws driody av mddas § 95 
extr. and elsewhere. Of this 
sentiment, also, we have a little 
too much in these speeches. 

§§ 120, 121. Androtion and 
his colleagues have committed 
not merely robberies but the 
worst of sacrilege; their madness 
would seem to be a judgment 
from the goddess herself, like 
the fate of those who mutilated 
the statue of Victory. 

§ 120. etpyxe Tov véuor] ‘ He 
has invented, devised this pre- 
cious law of his.’ The true 
reading, instead of the impos- 
sible elpyxe which is never found 
with yvéuov, is preserved by 2 
and another (corrected) MS. and 
has carried conviction to the 
minds of all critics. 

Tas dexdras| ‘ Minerva of the 
Parthenon received the tithe of 
the plunder, and of captures, 
and also of certain fines; while 
others were paid to the temples 
without any deduction, together 
with the tithe either of all or 
a large proportion of confiscated 
property. The tithes of Minerva 
are mentioned in connexion 
with the fiftieths of other gods, 


and of the heroes of the tribes 
(érdvupor); the latter were pro- 
bably similar percentages, and 
must not be confounded with 
the custom duty of the fiftieth” 
Boeckh P. E. p. 328. He might 
have added that these dexdarac 
are also not to be confounded 
with the dexdry or tithe of land, 
or with tolls or taxes of ten 
per cent. like that mentioned 
in Xen. Hell. 1. 2. § 22, riv 
Sexdtnv é&édeyov tay Ex TOU 
Ilévrov miolwv. For the tithe 
of the spoils of war Boeckh 
refers to § 129 below, dzocrepiv 
Tas awd TOV vuetépwv troreulwy 
dexdras: and to Lys. c. Poly- 
strat. § 24 éAnifounv...dore TH 
bem te Tas dexdras é&apeOiva 
wéov 7 TpidKovTa puvds Kal Tots 
oTparwwrats eis cwrnpiav. As to 
another passage he appears to 
be mistaken: in Andoc. de Myst. 
§ 133 dpxwvns éyévero rijs Tev- 
TykooTHs Tplrov éros can only 
refer to the two per cent. im- 
port duty. Cf. Harpocrat. s. v. 
dexarevev: Phot. 8, v. dbexarev- 
tous: Dict. Antiq. s. v. ‘ Decu- 
mae.’ 

Ty apxnv ovde dynveyxar] 
‘that they never brought the 


P. 738.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


187 


’ \ b] , PS) / ’ , > Py \ \ \ 
I2I Kav €lS THY AKPOTTONLY, O€OV AUTOUS. Olu“al OE VN TOV 


’ ie 
Ala tov Odvptriov, & avdpes SixacTal, ovK amo Tav- 
, \ e \ \ ¢ / b] a] a 
Towatov Tiv UBpw Kal THY vTrepnpaviay émredOeiv 
a al ad ye 
"Avodpotiav, arr ve THs Oeod érurreupOetcar, iv’, 
’ / a“ , 
‘OoTep of TA axpwTnpia THS Nixns Tepixovraytes 
, , b>] 4 ¢ ’ ¢ lal vA \ & > \ 
aT@XovTO avTol Ud avToY, OVTW Kal ovTOL avTol 
a / 
avrois Sixalomevot aTrodowTo, Kal Ta Ypnwata KaTa- 
an / \ ' / xX n 
Ociev SexatrAacia KaTa TovS Vopous 7) SeOcier. 
a a / 
BovrAopat 8 vpiv, 0 petakd Aéywov epi TovTaV 
3 , > Lal \ & / / U , 
éveOupnOny, eitrety Trept ob TéVetKe Vvomov, Trapadokov 


money into the Acropolis at all, 
when they were bound to do 
so.’ Why this was worse sa- 
crilege than taking it out of the 
treasury does not appear. 

§ 121. dd ravroudrov] ‘ by 
accident’ K. ‘zufiillig’ Bemseler: 
opp. to érimeudbeicar, ‘the re- 
sult of judicial blindness.’ 

Ta axpwrnpia Tis Nixyns] These 
men had ‘mutilated’ (cf. Mid. 
p- 562 § 147 rovs ‘Epuas mepi- 
éxorrev) the chryselephantine 
statue of Victory by cutting off 
the golden ornaments or ‘ex- 
tremities.’ It seems hardly 
worth while to raise the ques- 
tion whether axpwripia could 
mean ‘ wings’ as the Scholiast 
explains it: the reference is, 
almost certainly, not to the 
temple of Niké Apteros, still 
extant in good preservation, but 
to the figure of Victory held in 
the hand of the great statue of 
Athena. Nothing further is 
known of the incident. 

arwdovTo avtol vd abrdv] 
The Scholiast in telling the 
story throws no light upon the 
meaning of this expression: 
he merely repeats the words, 
K. translates ‘ perished by their 
own hands’: it is not necessary 
to infer suicide, and we get a 


closer parallel to the case of 
Androtion and his associates 
if, with Benseler, we suppose 
that they quarrelled over the 
division of the spoil and so 
were brought to justice. 
dixagouevc] The reading of 
the inferior MSS. dcadccafouerar 
would imply that they were 
ruined by the diadicacia (§ 13) 
which determined the question 


-of liability as between them 


and the trierarchs. But this 
would not account for the ten- 
fold forfeiture. The text is 
rightly rendered by K. and Ben- 
seler: ‘by litigating among 
themselves,’ ‘dass sie durch 
ihre eignen Prozesse stiirzen 
méchten.’ 

§ 122. A pretended after- 
thought. Why did Timocrates 
pointedly. except all connected 
with the farming of taxes from 
the operation of his law? This 
is a repetition of the argument 
of §§ 59, 60: and the real reason 
was, as we have seen, that the 
Athenians would not have stood 
any weakening of their hold 
over the reAovac and their 
sureties. 

mapddoksy ri] The well-sup- 
ported variant mapddoyév (AQ 
Tkrs and yp. ZF) would mean 


188 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 122-124. 


\ ¢ / e \ a 
Tl, Oavpactov nAiKov. ovTOS yap, © avopes Sixacral, 
a \ \ ’ 
Tols péev Ta TEXAN WVvOUMEVOLS Eyparpe TAS TIWwplas 
> > \ \ \ -” 
elval, eb uy) KaTaBaAOLEY TA YpHnuaTA, KATA TOUS VO- 
C \ / b] ¢ 
provs Tovs TpoTépous, év ols Kal 0 Seapos Kal 7) Sumda- 
/ / ? / ¢ a ! 
cia yéypartat avOpetrots, of Sia TO Enpuodabae er» 
~ > nm »¥ ” \ / > l : nw 
TH WV axovTes EueAXOV THY TOALY adLKNoEW" TOis 8 
a / \ a a 
Upatpoupévols TA THS TOEWS Kal (epocVAODOL TA TIS 
Basha \ 34 on EO Re ee ' 
€oD TOV Seapov adeirev. KaiTov® ef wev EXATTM TOU- 
Tous aodiKely exeiv@v vopicat pynoeis, avayKn paive- 
/ ¢ a ’ , 
aPai ce cporoyeiv, et dé pela vopifwrv, dotep éoTwy, 
Oe 4 eS \ \ EY ee eer > 
éxeiva Tadiknpata Tovs pev adins*, Tovs dé un, OUK 
” a 5 \ \ a 
non SHros ei TETPAKwS TO TPAayLa TOUTOLS ; 
Pe / \ a 3 > lal ig € a , 
Evov Tolvuv Kal TOUT Eizreiy, dcov Vueis Siadé- 


739 


123 

pete, & avopes Sixactal, weyadkodpootyyn tav pnto- 
ray f ee ae, ee r : 

pov. vets pev ye TA él TH TANOEL vevopobeTHnMEéEva 


© kal Z cum = (qui tamen kairo in yp). 
f adies Z Bens. adueis Cobet. 


precisely the same thing. The 
two words are joined together 
by the author of 1. Aristog. 
p- 780 § 32 éx dé rod mapaddéov 
kal mapahdyou. 

Oavyacrov hriKxov] ‘something 
extraordinary, wonderfully so’ 
R. W. rightly: Lat. mirum 
quantum, As Shilleto points 
out de F. L. p. 368 § 87=98 
. ws Oavpase Aika mecoduevor, Cav- 
paorov is practically adverbial. 
Cf. ib. p. 348 .§ 24=27. 

bid 7H KnmrodcOa él Ty wry] 
‘owing to -losses upon their 
. biddings’ or contracts’ as redo- 
va. K. gives the general sense: 
‘by having made a bad bar- 
gain.’ 

TOUTOUS...€KELVWD ... EKEIVA TADL- 
xnuata] The meaning is quite 
clear, but the use of the pro- 
nouns rather tortuous, éxeiva 
being=7a Tovrwy, not Ta éxel- 


vwv. On change of pronouns 
referring to the same person, 
compare notes on Plat. Protag. 
310 p, 318 ¢. 

djdros ef rempaxws] ‘is it not 
plain that you have sold your 
services to them for a bribe ?” 

§§ 123—138. Timocrates’ law 
is for the benefit of notoriously 
undeserving and worthless men, 
Examples of better men who 
have been punished, while the 
men who have bribed the de- 
fendant are to get off, 

§ 123. Athenian law does 
not spare the poor who offend, 
however sorely tempted, much 
less the rich: but (§ 124) these 
orators show the hatred of up- 
starts for the class from which 
they sprang. 

Ta €ml TO WANE vevouobern- 
péva dewa] ‘the severe enact- 
ments against the multitude’: 


p.739.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 189 


\ >7 x / Aa" ee D Is lal 
dewva, éav Tis 7 SuyoOev praodopy 7) opeih@v TO Sn- 
U Dy v e ¢ 
pocio éxxrnoratn  Sixalyn 7 Gro TL TOW wv Ot 
b) , \ ws ON ¢ 7 
vomor ATayopevovaw, ov AVETE, Kal TAVT ELdOTES OTL 
¢ Ud a 
dua weviavy av® rouoevev 6 TOV7MY TL TrOLMY, OUEE 
t , ec, 3 2 sae h 2 
vomous Totovtous TiWecO’, dmrws éEouvcia éotas” é&a- 
a > \ ’ / v4 /, > oh 4 € 
bapTety, AANA TOVVAVTLOVY OTTWS fy" OVTOL &, OWS Ob 
/ a 

Ta aloxyiota Kal Ta SewoTata TroLobyTes Sixny py 
, 9S / ¢ an paws a 
124 dwoovow. €iTa TpoTNAaKifova w UUs Lola TOLS 

\ > a 
Adyous, WS avTol Kadol Kayabol, Tovnpav Kai aya- 

z \ \ 
plotwy olkeT@v TpOToUS éxyovTES. Kal yap éxelvar, 
i ” \ v4 x 3 , / > 
@ avopes SiKactal, dc0t av édevOepos yév@vTat, ov 
THS édXevOepias yap exovat Tois Seamdtais, adda 

n , 7, , , * 

picoder padiota TavtTwv' avOpeTwr, OTe cuvicacw 


avuTots dovAEevoacwy. 


ef \ \ e Sus 
OUT@ 7) Kat OvUTOL Ob P7)TOPES 


& dv om. Bens. cum libris. Illud e coni. Bekk. 


h égra avrois Z. 


the sense of éml, ‘applying to’ 
(§ 59 n.) passes imperceptibly 
into that of ‘against.’ The last 
corrector of 2 has émi rév mov- 
ciwy, manifestly against the 
sense; one among many exam- 
ples which prove that = does 
not merely represent the best 
tradition of the Demosthenic 
text, but has often been inju- 
diciously corrected. — d:xd0er] 
‘from both sides.’ 

opettuv TH Snnocly éxkrdn- 
oid{n] The spirit which prompt- 
ed this legislation has been 
indicated in a note on Androt, 
§ 48. 

AveTe] ‘repeal,’ as § 38 and 
elsewhere. xwdvere is a bad cor- 
rection, 

bia weviay dv moroeev] ay, 
which might easily have dropt 
out after reviav, was first added 
by Bekker, Benseler unsuccess- 


i réavrwv om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum >. 


fully attempts to defend the 
MS. reading. 

§ 124. kal yap éxelvwy] i.e. 
not olxerwv in general, but zo- 
vnpav kal axaplorwv ox. Grati- 
tude on the part of freedmen 
was not only the rule, but was 
enforced by law through the 
dixn arooraciov: see Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. ‘ Apostasiou Diké.’ 

padicra mavrev dvOpwrav] If 
mavTwy is omitted (see various 
readings) pddior ‘dvOpwrwy - 
should be written, as uwdduora 
is almost always elided. Din- 
dorf approves the omission in 
his note (ed. Oxon.) but retains 
the common reading in his © 
text (Teubner, 1881). He refers 
to Pantaen. p. 980 § 49 juoen- 
Oeins av Sixadrar dvOpdmrwr. 
Benseler gives further refer- 
ences which abundantly justify 
the reading of 2. 


190 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 124, 125. 
> ’ lal > / / ’ \ a / : 
ovK ayaToow €k TEVIT@OV TAOVGLOL ATO THS TOAEWS 
‘ 3 \ \ / \ n ¢/ 
yuyvopevol, AANA Kal TpoTNAaKiovat TO TACOS, OTL 
oUVOLOEY AUTOY EKaoToUs* Ta év TH TWEvia Kai VEOTHTL 
ET LTNOEU MATA. 
"ArAd vn Av’, 
Ojvar 7 VRavKérnv 7 MedXavotor’ ov pa tov Ai’, o 
avOpes Suxactal, adda TOD aicytov' T1V TOW abi- 
O oe eS f \ op: Ou, EPR tae | 
Koupevnyv Kal vBpifomevny pn AaBEtv dixny Kai vTrEp 
THs Geod Kal vrép avThs. émet “Avdpotiwmvi ye 1o- 
Tepa ov TaTp@ov TO SedécOat; arr avTol tote Tod- 
\ / > a / / \ 
Ads trevteTnpidas ev TH SecpwTnpiw SvatpipavTa TOV 


125 aisxypov tcws nv ’Avdpotiwva de- 


740 


k €xaoros Bens. cum =F vy. 


ovK ayaTacw...yryvduevo.] ‘are 
not content with raising them- 
selves’ from poverty to wealth: 
rather than ‘with having been 
raised’ (yevduevor). 

amd THs modews] ‘at the ex- 
pense of the state,’ and so, as 
K. translates, ‘through their 
political career.’ amd often ex- 
presses what people live on, or 
draw their supplies from : Zi 
Phil. p- 49 § 84 do Tov Uperé- 
pov wvpiv morepuer TULPAX wr. 
Thueyd. 1. 81 § 4 Tas mpoaddous 
dpaipjnoomev ad’ wy TO vaUTLKOY 
Tpépover. So in the phrases 
chy, duagfnv dard twos, for which 
see the Lexicons: Shilleto on 
Argum. F. L. notices as ex- 
ceptional Plato, Laws iI. 679 
A 7 dn TO whelovor dvéfwy ‘quum 
ad ys in more usurpetur.’ Com- 
pare Cobet, Nov. Lect. p. 573. 

Ta ev TH ‘revig—erirndebpara] 
‘how each of them used to live 
in his younger and humbler 
days’ K. very neatly. 

§§ 125—130. Origin and cha- 
racter of Androtion, Glauketes, 
and Melanopus: none surely 
can have deserved imprisonment 


1 aloxpov Bens. cum >. 


more than these men, who for- 
sooth will be held up to us as 
men whom it would be monstrous 
to imprison, 

§ 125. ’AMAG vy AV] An- 
drot. § 69 n. 

mov alox.ov] Benseler’s at- 
tempt to make out a case for 
the reading of = is very forced. 
He says aicxpdv is used sub- 
stantively; but such a phrase 
as alicxpov Kal dewdy moelty in 
Isocr. Panath. § 203 and De- 
mosth. ¢. Aristocr. § 143 does 
not bring us much nearer the 
pretended use of odd alcxpov 
for péya bvecdos. 

marpwov Td dedécOai] ‘is not 
imprisonment an inheritance 
from his father?’ The humour 
of the passage suggests also 
the ironical rendering, ‘an he- 
reditary distinction’; see the 
next note. For the fact, ef. 
Androt. §§ 56, 68. 

mo\das wevternplias] There 
is surely comic exaggeration 
here, even when we remember 
that mwevrernpis is a period of 
four years, not five. Nothing 
is more certain than that long 


P. 740.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


% 
191 


n > 
matép avtTov Kal amodpavta, ard ovK adeévta. 


imprisonment was practically 
unknown to the Greeks, espe- 
cially to the Athenians; they 
had neither the appliances in 
the shape of walls and bars, 
nor were they willing to incur 
the expense. Imprisonment be- 
fore trial was common enough, 
but would not last long. After 
trial it was employed either (1) 
as a way of ‘putting on the 
screw’ to extract payment, in 
which it was generally success- 
ful, or (2) as a public stigma 
put upon disgraceful offences 
(§§ 105, 114), or (3) it preceded 
execution. In this last case, 
owing to the insecurity of the 
building (otknua), the prisoner 
was chained, and was under the 
special custody of the Eleven. 
It is altogether improbable that 
Androtion’s father had spent so 
much as four consecutive years 
within the walls of a prison. 
-The Scholiast saw the exag- 
geration of this statement, and 
says that Demosth. did not 
mean it literally (am\és), but 
used the plural for the singular 
ad invidiam (émi 7d éraxOéoTe- 
pov dépwv tov déyov). In the 
words xara wévre érn ayeTo TH 
Tlavabjvaa, rote Oe e&Hv adel- 
cba rods deouwras did THY Tavi- 
yupw, the Schol. appears to 
have confused two distinct 
things: a holiday like that at 
the Dionysia, when the prison- 
ers were let out on parole during 
the festival (Androt. § 68), and 
an amnesty or kind of sabbati- 
cal year, involving their entire 
discharge. We have no evi- 
dence whatever that such a rule 
existed in connexion with the 
Greater Panathenaea (§ 26 n.); 
and even if there were, the 
statement that A.’s father 


‘spent many quinquennial pe- 
riods in prison’ is not explained 
by saying that he ‘ once got the 
benefit of a quinquennial empty- 
ing of gaols.’ The fact is that 
a tone of banter runs through 
the whole passage. 

The late Greek form zrevrae- 
tnpléas is here found only in 
one inferior MS. The texts of 
some other writers have been 
less fortunate than that of De- 
mosthenes; but the true forms 
of the compounds of zéyre and 
of other numerals are proved 
against the MSS. by the incor- 
ruptible evidence of metre and 
inscriptions, and are insisted 
upon by Phrynichus. (See Lo- 
beck, p. 412 ff. or better still 
Rutherford, p. 489; Cobet Var. 
Lect. p. 248.) 

amrodpdvyra] In Androt. § 68 
it was é£opynodmevos, an addi- 
tional comic touch: A.’s father 
broke his parole after the Dio- 
nysiac holiday. This custom 
must have rested on a well- 
grounded assumption that an 
Athenian citizen would prefer 
a prison to exile (for of course, 
if he escaped, he could not re- 
main in the country); and is a 
further proof that the impri-. 
sonment was neither of long 
duration nor very painful while 
it lasted (cf. § 131). The con- 
trast between an Athenian and 
an English prison (and execu- 
tion) is drawn out to the disad- 
vantage of the latter by Prof. 
Mahaffy, Social Life in Greece, 
p. 265 ff. Elsewhere, however, 
he does not disguise the fact 
that the avoidance of certain 


‘repulsive features of our mo- 


dern practice was accompanied 
by a singular indifference to 
human life. A state which 


192 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 126, 127. 


126 adda Sid Ta Eritndevpata Ta ev TH AAIKIQ; ANAA 


127 


kal dia tadta Sedéc0ar avT@ ovy NTToY TpoanKer 4) 
80 amep dheireTo. 1 OTL cloner eis THY ayopay OvK 
éfov avTe, Kal é€x TavTHS Tos cwpPpovws BeBiwxdtas 
autos Hyev eis TO SecpwTynptov; adryga Medaverros 
devvov v7) Ai’ éativ et SeOncecOas viv Ewedrev’ adda 
Tept ev TOD TaTpds avTov ovdev av Pradpov EltroLme, 
ovd ef wavy TON exw wepl KNOTS Eye, GAN’ 
éotw éuol éxelvds ye TovodTos otov av ‘Tiwoxparns 


QUTOV éyKwpLaceser. 


punished capitally the usurpa- 
tion of the franchise by a non- 
voter (Androt. § 48 n.) was 
clearly at no loss to dispose of 
its ‘ criminal classes.’ 

§ 126. ra émirndetuara ra év 
TH HAtkia] Ironically, in refer- 
ence to the charge of éralpyets, 
Androt. §§ 21, 29, 73.—év’ dep 
Udetdero ‘because of his pecula- 
tions.’ 

cloner eis THY aryopay ovK ébov 
avrg] As jraipnkws he was or 
deserved to be ariuos, and there- 
fore excluded from the da-yopd. 
Cf. els rijv dopa €uBddrdy, above 
§ 103'n. 

ryev eis TO Secuwrjpiov] His 
acts of oppression detailed in 
Androt. §§ 52, 56. 

Me\dvwrros| Nothing is known 
of him except what may be 
gathered from the present pas- 
sage, and one additional fact 
recorded by Harpoeration s.v. 
that he was the brother-in-law 
(xndeor7s) of the orator Dio- 
phantus. It has been thought 
improbable that he was the son 
of the well-known general in 
the Peloponnesian war, killed 
at Mantinea in 418 (Thucyd. v. 
74): and Droysen (quoted by 
Benseler) thought that his fa- 
ther was to be identified with a 


aXN e xXpnoTOD TaTpos wv 


Laches mentioned by Lysias 
(adv. Simon. § 45) as general in 
392, and himself a son of the 
more famous Laches. But Ben- 
seler argues that as Androtion, 
Melanopus and Glauketes were 
all three old men, he may after 
all have been the son of a man 
who lost his life 65 years before. 
The father was evidently a man 
of some note, and Demosth. 
‘will not speak a word against 
him, though he might say a 
good deal about certain thieve- 
ries.’ Now the elder Laches 
was the son of Melanopus, of 
the deme Aexonae; he was 
recalled p.c. 426 from the com- 
mand in Sicily, where he had 
made a ‘pot of money’ (ciu- 
Prov xpnudrwy Aristoph. Vesp. 
241) for which he was to be 
prosecuted by Cleon: and he is 
almost certainly the Ad@8ys Ai- 
Ewveds impeached by the xtwr 
Kvdabnvaceds (i.e. Cleon) for 
‘devouring the Sicilian cheese 
all to himself’ (ib. 895 ff). The 
point is well brought out in 
Dict. Biogr. s.v. ‘aches’; and 
the received view is probably 


’ the right one. © 


§ 127. oloy dv...éyxwuidoecer] 
‘For all that I have to say, let 
the father be as excellent a man 


P, 740.) 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


193 


\ \ l s \ , ra © f 
movnpos Kal KréTTNS HY Kal Tpodocias ye adovs Tpia 
Taravta arétice, Kal auvédpov yevouevou KoTTHY 


ee ee t , \ ’ Su of 
aQvUTOU TO dvxacTnpLov KATEYV@ KAL dexaTTAac Lov QaATrE- 


/ , 
Tice, Kal TapeTrpesBevoato eis AiyuTrrov, Kal Tovs 
nr / , a 
aderdhovs tovs éavtod HdlKel, ov ToToVT@ paAov 
nw \ Qn 
aurov @der SedécGat, ef Ypnttod TaTpos wv ToLOUTOS 


as Timocrates would make him 
out,’ K. But there is further, 
I think, an insinuation of ‘ex- 
travagant praise’ or ‘ puffery’ 
in éyxwpidoecevy, which Benseler 
accordingly translates ‘ heraus- 
streichen,’ ‘puff him off.’ Athe- 
nian custom allowed the merits 
of a parent to be urged on a 
trial, as it put up with the less 
relevant appeal of the weeping 
children of the accused. Such 
claims did not, however, count 
for much when the people were 
really exasperated. If we con- 
demn the Athenians for the 
fate of the younger Pericles, 
one of the six generals at Ar- 
ginusae, we may be reminded 
that Admiral Byng was himself 
the son of a man who had won 
his peerage in the same pro- 
fession. 

kal mpodocias ye adods tpla 
TadavTa amérise] One of the 
passages which prove that 
‘treason’ was not always capi- 
tally punished. In [Demosth. ] 
c. Theocrin, extr. we read of a 
fine of ten talents for the same 
offence. The law of mpodocia 
was extremely elastic: Dict. 
Antiq. 8.v. *Prodosia,’ 

kai cuvédpou yevouévou] ‘when 
he had been a member of con- 
gress ;’ i.e, of the congress of 
allies, held under the new ar- 
rangement after B.c. 377 upon 
more equitable principles as 
regards the dependent states. 
Dict. Antiqg. 8.v. ‘Synedri.’ 


W. Dz 


This is K.’s rendering of the 
word when it occurs below § 150: 
and he would have done better 
to translate it so here, instead 
of ‘when he was his colleague.’ 
It is not likely that. Melanopus’ 
frauds were tried in the same 
court in which they had been 
committed. The monies he 
had misapplied were clearly sa- 
cred, as is shown by the dexa- 
mAdo.ov: and Benseler thinks 
that he had been one of the 
‘assessors’ (Beisitzer) to the 
archon Basileus in a case of 
sacrilege, who, he declares, were 
also called otvedpo.. He gives 
no proofs; and in this sense we 
should rather expect mdpedpos. 
The peculations, on the other 
hand, may very easily have 
been connected with some tem- 
ple, like that at Delos, belong- 
ing to the allies. : 

wapemperBevoaro els Atyurrov] 
‘he betrayed his duty on an 
embassy to Egypt.’ This was 
not the occasion mentioned in 
§ 12, when he was ambassador 
to Mausolus in Caria. In this . 
sense mpesBeverv is commonly 
used: while mpesBever0ac the 
‘causal’ middle is ‘to send an 
embassy, cause ambassadors to 
go: like dtédoxew, diddoxerOat. 
Hence the form oi rapampecBev- 
ovres de F. L. p. 401 § 191=211 
is more regular than that now 
before us. We find, however, 
mapamperBevnra in Plato, Laws 
xu. 941 a. 


13 


194 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 128, 129. 


es . 4 ae: >» a Ss avid 
V3 Olbat yap éywy, eltep TO OvTL ypnoTos Hv Ad- 
\ , Se > a x b] / lal 
xs Kat irowonds, UT avTod av éxeivou SeOjvat 
rn a> ow 7 > al > 
avuTov TovovTov y bvTa Kal oVTwS aicypots oveidect 


TwepiBarrovtT €KElvov. 


Kal TovTov pev on) éaper, 
128 [avxérnv 5€ cxeyrdpeba. 


> e a 
OVX OvUTOS €oTW O Tpa- 


\ eo] / b] / Rd an ¢ / 
Tov pev eis AexédNeray avtomornoas, KaKxeiOev OpL@- 
/, \ / \ ¢ a] > ‘ U 
pevos Katabéwr kai hépwv Kal dywv vuas 3 ada Tav- 


Tes loTE TADTA. 


éveideot meptBaddovTa] ‘put- 
ting such a stigma’ upon his 
father; ‘involving him in such 


disgrace.’ The phrase occurs 
Androt. §§ 35, 63. 
§ 128. eis AexéXeray adro- 


podjoas| Unlike his fellows, 
Glauketes is unknown to the 
classical dictionaries. If he 
was really old enough to have 
deserted in the AexeXerkds mdXe- 
pos (Androt. § 15 n.) of B.c, 413 
—404, the chronological diffi- 
culty is even greater than in the 
case of Melanopus, who may 
have been an infant at the time 
cf his father’s death in 418. 
According to one account, pre- 
served by the Scholiast, he did 
not desert, butwas taken prisoner. 

KaxelOev dpudpevos}] ‘and mak- 
ing it his head-quarters sallied 
thence to overrun and plunder 
you.’ The phrase dyew kal é- 
pew is more commonly followed 
by the name of the country, 
not of its inhabitants; and K. 
is perhaps right in translating 
vuds ‘the country.’ On the 
charge thus recklessly levelled 
A. Schaefer very sensibly re- 
marks: ‘Whether Glauketes 
reached the Spartan camp as a 
deserter or a prisoner of war, he 
can hardly have taken part in 
the hostilities against his coun- 


a ha Bee ate \ \ a ¢ / / 
Kal 0 aro peéev TOV VuETEpwY Tald@Y 
fal a / 
Kal yuvaikdy kal TOV GdrwY yYpnuaTaV, dca NaBoL, 741 


trymen’ (Demosth. 1. 329, note 
3). 
kal 6 dwé pév] ‘and is not he 
the man who,’ &c. In this sen- 
tence ovx ovrés éorwy is to be re- 
peated,asG.H.Schaeferremarks, 
placing a note of interrogation 
at dapexo’s, which Dindorf ap- 
proves. The first question is an- 
swered by d\\d mavtes tore TavTa: 
the second by d\\a raira vy’ 
ottw twepipavn. Other skilfully 
balanced antitheses are pointed 
out by Mr Whiston: ‘with rav 
ipnetépwv maidwy is contrasted 
Tav vuerépwr todeulwy: with 
éxe? TG Appoory, TH 5é vy’ evOdde 
Gedy, the last especially striking 
and invidious.’ A somewhat 
similar passage equally well 
worked out has been noticed 
Androt. § 56 n. 

Tov add\eov xpnudrwv] To 
avoid such an expression as 
‘your other property’ following 
‘ your children and your wives,’ 
we might translate according to 
a well-known idiom ‘your pro- 
perty as well.’ This use of 
dd os is not unfrequent in Plato, 
and is sometimes absolutely ne- 
cessary to the sense: Gorg. 473 
C TaY ToNTaY Kal TaY addX\wv 
éévwv: ib, 480 D abrod cal Trav 
ad\Awv olxeiwy: Tim. 76 Dd y- 
vaixes Kat Ta\Aa Onpia (!). But 





4 ‘i 
SD OF 


p.741.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS| U V1 VERS 


129 


Sexatas éxel TH appooTh KataTiOels TOUT 
Thv dé y évOade Ocdv, mpecBevTHs akiwOeis et 


a 


¢€ an ’ n \ >’ \ a ¢ / / 
UVLO), aTTOOTEPWV TAS ATO TMV UPETEPOV TONELLOY 


> la > A a 
Sexatas, €rerta TapLevaas EV GKpoTrONEL TAPLOTELA TNS 
¢ \ bd] \ el U c , 
Torcws, @™ EhaBev ato tav BapBapwv, vpynpnuévos 


m ¢ om. Bens. cum =. 


to include wives and children 
under xpyuara was not really 
strange to the Athenian mind, 
any more than to the Oriental. 
There is high primitive autho- 
rity for reckoning a man’s 
‘wife’ as simply the first item 
in the contents of his ‘ house.’ 

éxe? TH Gpuoorn| The har- 
most of the Peiraeus after the 
surrender of Athens; the name 
would not be applied to the 
commander of the garrison at 
Decelea. It thus becomes less 
easy to fix the exact time to 
which Demosthenes is referring: 
probably he does not fix it him- 
self, but seizes the opportunity 
of bringing in the obnoxious 
word apuocris. 

§ 129. rametoas év dxpo- 
mé\e] ‘when he was treasurer 
in the Acropolis :’ Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. *Tamias.’ rayevew=rTa- 
plas eivac naturally takes a 
genitive like Baowevew: thus 
we have in Mid. p. 570 § 173 
Tis wapddov Tamevoas. L. and 
S. cannot be right in joining 
Tapicreta to Tametoas, as if 
these particular objects were 
under his care: he was rayias 
Tis Oeod, i.e. of the Acropolis 
and all thatitcontained. There 
is, I believe, only one certain 
example in prose of ramevew 
with acc.=doKxe’y, Lys. Or. 21 
§ 14 rov Ta THs Torews dpiv 
Tamwevovrwy: in other passages 
it has been taken thus, but may 
(and I think ought to) be other- 
wise explained. These are Lys. 


de Bonis Aristoph. § 40 és égv- 
Aarrev air@ xal érapieve rdvta 
Ta év Kirpw: Plat. Rep. v. 465 
D Ta 6é...ramevew mapadévTes. 
In the former passage mrdvra 
may be joined to é@vAarre, the 
words xal érauteve coming in 
as an afterthought (cf. Androt. 
§ 4 n. mdarrwv Kal trapdywr). 
In the latter, the construction 
of course is, Ta dé mapadévres 
wore Tamevey, It is important, 
when occasion offers, to justify 
the general rules of Greek verb- 
formation: one of the broadest 
of these is that verbs in -eiw 
are intransitive, and any ap- 
parent exceptions should be 
narrowly watched. wparedw is 
(1) not derived from a noun (2) 
not a prose word: pacrevw in 
Xenophon I leave to the tender 
mercies of Mr Gunion Ruther- 
ford (New Phryn. p. 171). 

a& €\aBev ard rv BapBdpwr] 
Benseler alone shows his de- 
votion to MS. = by leaving out 
& This reading undoubtedly 
originated in a desire to fur- 
nish the sentence with a prin- 
cipal verb, which at present it 
is without. Demosth. could not 
possibly have written rapucreia 
THs Todews EXaBev awd Tav Bap- 
Bdpwy in the sense ‘took away 
the trophies of the state, won 
from the barbarians:’ he would 
not have used é@\afev in this 
sense, and he must have said ra 
amd T&v BapBdpwr. It is evident 
that rdporeta goes with 6 ddypn- 
pévos, as K. and R. W. took it. 


13—2 






130 


196 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 130-132. 


é& axpoTrovews, Tov Te Sidpov 
tov axwaxnv Tov Mapooviov, 


\ > U 
TOV apyupoToda Kal 
\ 
Os YE TpLakoaious 
eee S \ PSs % ¢/ a > v4 
dapecxovs; adda Tavta y oUTw TEpipavy EoTW WaTE 
GNA TaddAXa ov Biatos ; 
is 8 / / b) a 
eita deicacGai Tivos avTaV 
v U b] e } \ ¢ x a a a n 
aé.ov €otiv, @oTe Sua TOUTOUS 7) TaV SeKaTaOV TOV 
al r bd] “a x Lal / lal ¢ , 
THs Ocod apernoat ) THs SuTAaclas TOY dciwv “pn- 
, Ds 
HaT@V, 7) TOV TOVTOUS TrELp@mEevoY THEY fA) TLLMPN- 
cac0at; Kal ti Kodvoe. Eavtas elvat Tovnpovs, @ 
vv \ > \ a / A > \ 
avopes Sixacral, et dud tavTa Tréov EEovow; eyo 
fev yap olwat ovodév. 
» trav om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum =F vB. 


U > , > / 
mavtas avOpwmrous eidévar. 
¢ b] \ > ’ 
ws oudels avOperrmr. 


tov Te Sidppov Tov apyvpbroda]} 
According to the Scholiast, the 
throne of Xerxes from which he 


‘witnessed the battle of Salamis. 


adxwaxyv] The short straight 
Persian ‘ sword,’ figured in Dict. 
Antiq. s. v. from the bas-reliefs 
of Persepolis. The common 
renderings ‘scimitar’ and ‘dag- 
ger’ (as K.) are less accurate. 

és wye Tptaxooiovs daperkxovs] 
‘which weighed 300 darics.’ 
K. by an oversight translates 
‘was worth:’ in Androt. § 76 
he has given it rightly (see the 
note there). The daric being 
somewhat heavier than the so- 
vereign, we have upwards of 
80 ounces Troy for the weight 
of the metal: rather too much 
for a ‘dagger.’ This trophy 
was shown to Pausanias (1. 27, 
1): whether it was found again, 
or had never been stolen, or 
miraculously reappeared like 
the Sainte Ampoule at the coro- 
nation of Charles X., it is hardly 
worth while to inquire. 

Bias] ‘ violent:’ ready to use 
force, and take the law into his 
own hands, rather than as K. 
‘brutal.’ 

§ 130. 


Tay dexarQv trav Tijs 


Oco0] See the various readings. 
The omission is rather favoured 
by § 120: the repetition -ray 
trav cuts both ways. 

Ts Ourdacias Tw dolwv] $1110. 

Tov ToUTOUS TELpwuEVoY Ture | 
The return to Timocrates and 
his law, after this digression 
upon the three ambassadors, is 
managed in a way that shows 
the skilled rhetorician. 

méov €£ovo.v] ‘if they are to 
profit by their rascality’ (7o- 
vnpia) : an idiomatic use of réov 
éxeww, cf. below § 209. K. should 
not have indulged in the literal- 
ism ‘if they get more by it.’ 

§$ 131—138. Examples of 
wholesome severity in recent 
time, measured out to less 
serious offenders. The indig- 
nation of these men at the pro- 
spect of imprisonment is absurd, 
if you think how common that 
punishment is, and to whom it 
is applied (131, 132). In the 
old times men of high previous 
reputation were imprisoned, in 
spite of their former services 
(133). Names mentioned of cases 
under the restored democracy: 
these men knew that the law 
did not allow them to put in 


131 


132 


Pp. 741.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


197 


M?) roivuy avtol didacKete, GAA Tipwpeicbe. 


i 1 3A ; - > , ” \ 
Kal pn eate ayavaxtelv, eb SeOncovtar exovtes TA 


¢ / ? , ” > eb] ‘ ¢ \ \ / . joe 
ULETEPA, GAN AYET AVTOVS UTO TOUS VOMOVS" OVOE 
yap of ths Eevias adioKdpevor ayavaxtovow év TO 


? / / ” isa * a 8 : al 
olk}pmate ToUT@ OVTES, Ews av Tov YrevdopapTupLaV 
\ a 

dyovicwytat, GdAdAa pévovot Kal ove oiovtas deiv 


\ an 
éyyuntas KataoTycavTes Tmepuévat. édofe yap TH 


, ) a ? a \ > yy a 
Tone amictelv avTois, Kal ovK @eTto Sev Siaxpov- 


cbivat THS Timmplas Ov éyyunTav KaTacTacEws, GAN 


bail, and submitted cheerfully 
(134—136). To wish to bail out 
Androtion and his fellows is to 
insult your common sense, and 
to put a premium on sacrilege 
(137). Lastly, let me remind 
you of cases in which such of- 
fences were visited with death, 
or narrowly escaped it (138). 

§ 131. 6dddcxere] sc. 7d 1r0- 
ynpovds etvar, through your ill- 
timed leniency. 

oir As Eevias dduoKxomevor] ‘those 
who are by way. of being con- 
victed as aliens’ by a éevias 
pad, for which see Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. The present ddioxcuevot 
implies that the conviction has 
not reached its final stage, but is 
subject to an appeal. 

év TQ olxnuare ToUTw] It has 
been thought from the use of 
rovrw that the prison was visible 
from the dicastery, but this in- 
ference seems to me very doubt- 
ful. In reality év 7@ olk. rovrw 
is ‘in the building in question,’ 
i.e. év T@ Secuwrnpiw supplied 
from deAncovra. The secondary 
senses of olknua are well illus- 
trated in L, and §.: for that 
=deruwrypiov cf. below §$ 135, 
136, c. Zenoth. p. 890 § 29, c. 
Dionysodor. p. 1284 § 4, with 
Mr Paley’s note on the latter 
passage. 


éws dv Tdv wWevdouaprupioy 


aywvicwvrat] ‘ till after the trial 
for false testimony’ in which 
they are prosecutors. In cases 
of gevia an appeal was allowed 
on the ground that the witnesses 
were perjured, but pending such 
appeal the convicted party had 
to remain in prison. 

wévovor] Here the sense of 
pévew seems to shade off into 
that of brouévew: ‘they bear it 
patiently and do not think that 
they ought (to be allowed) to 
go about on giving bail.’ In 
the next section the usual sense 
of each verb is clearly dis- 
tinguished. 

§ 132. dmiretv] The penalty 
being slavery with forfeiture of 
goods, the terror of exile, so 
effective in keeping citizens to 
their bail (§ 125 n.), would 
afford no adequate security. 

SiaxpovoOjvac THs Ttuwplas] 
The 1 aor. pass. of middle verbs 
is almost always passive in 
meaning; and the right ren- 
dering is ‘she (the State) con- 
sidered that she ought not to be 
cheated out of her vengeance,’ 
with Reiske’s Index, K., and 
Benseler, rather than as L. and 
S. ‘that they ought not to 
escape punishment.’ On da- 
kpover Oat comp. Shilleto on F. L. 
§§ 37, 185. mapaxpovecOat bears 
nearly the same sense, and is 


198 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 133, 134. 


a 2 
évtav0a pévety avTovs ov Kal GrXroL ToAXOL THY 
a / \ b] } , “ty \ re) 256 
ToMTOY. KalTot Kal éml ypnpuaciy On TIVES? edé- 
® Ao f ? . ¢ / > \ 
Oncav kat ért Kpiceciv, aAN oOuws Uiréwevov. andes 
¥ , a 
pev ovv tows éotlv ovopactl Tept Tier peuvnoOat, 
na > \ \ / 
avayxatov 6& wapefeTdcal avTovs Tapa TovToUS. 
\ 
133 Tovs pev ovv mpd EvKreldov apyovtos édow Kal Tos 742 
ON 
odddpa taraovs. Kaitos Kata Tovs ypovous ovs? 
éxactot avTav noav, ToAAOD aévoe SoKodvTEs YeryeE- 
n ‘ / / a 
vicbat Tov EuTrpoobev ypovoyv ouws' ioxupads Tapa 
lal n Lal UA 
ToD Onpov opyns éTUyxavoy emt Tols baTEpoV yuyvo- 
r > , ‘ ee. / X / ” 
Mévols adiKnpacLW ov yap ypovoy Twa SiKalous BETO 
n 3 \ ¢ / i 93 , b] \ / 
Oely AVTOUS 1) TOALS ElVaL, ELTA KAETTTAS, AAG TrEpL 
\ tia’ «ifs ’ + Oh \ Scat 
ye Ta KoLva ael Suxaiovs’ éddKxet yap TOV eumpoobev 
’ n 
xpovov ov picet, adr’ étBovdevorv, TOV TisTEVOHvat, 


© ties om. Bens. cum TAQTKr. P xa’ ovs Z Bekk. 
41 ouoiws Z Bens. cum >. 


frequent in Demosth. e.g. An- 
drot. § 39, above § 37. 

anées ... dvouacri... Meuvng bac] 
andés is here as nearly as pos- 
sible = érig@ovov, of an un- 
pleasant, invidious duty. Cf. 
Mid. p. 533 § 58 mapairjoomas 
& vuas pnd&y dxOecOjval pot, 
éav éxl cupgopais Tw av yeyovdTwv 
évouacrl uvnoO@. On the other 
hand, anéjs of persons is one 
who wilfully makes himself dis- 
agreeable or ‘nasty:’ c. Everg. 
et Mnes. p. 1147 § 28 piv pév 
eloaxOjvat eis TO Stkacripiov jv 
andns. For the habit of apolo- 
gising for naming men in pub- 
lic, Androt. § 55, below § 200. 

§ 133. mpd Hvxdeldov] Above, 
§ 42 n. To Demosthenes, the 
recent history of Athens began 
with the restored (and since 
unbroken) democracy. In An- 
drot. § 16 we have seen the war 
of Decelea called & Trav ap- 
xalwv, 


Tovs opbdpa manato’s]| Among 
these the instance of Miltiades 
is conspicuous, Grote, ch. 36 
(111. 312 ff.). The remarks on 
pp. 319—20 on the ‘ usual tem- 
per of Athenian dikasts in esti- 
mating previous services,’ and 
on the ‘tendency of eminent 
Greeks to be corrupted by suc- 
cess,’ are well worth reading in 
connexion with the present see- 
tion. 

isxupas ... ddiknuacw] ‘met 
with great severity from the 
people for their subsequent of- 
fences.’ 

émtBovevwy, TOU micTevOrvat] 
=€vexa Tov micrevOnva or iva 
mistevOetev. On this gen. of 
the cause or aim of the action, 
see Madvig, Synt. § 170 (more 
satisfactory than Jelf), émi- 
Bovr\eiwy is ‘with a sinister 
design,’ not simply ‘by design.’ 
The notion is a peculiarly Greek 
one, and surprising in a people 


P. 742.] 


a wv 
134 OiKatos yeyovévat 6 ToLvodTos avOpwros. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


199 


GANG pet? 


Ev«reldnv dpyovta, ® avdpes Stxactai, TpaTov pcv 


Opact’Bovrov tov KorAutéa tavtes pwéuvnobe Sis 
p ye 
SeOévTa Kal KoiOévta audotépas tas Koloes év TO 
P ‘ 
° ,’ 
énuw* Katto. Tav é€« Letpat@s Kal amo Purjs otTos 
NILE U) 
> 
nv. emeita Pireyrcov Tov Aaumtpéa. emevta  Ayvp- 


who had before them so many 
examples of the real nature and 
workings of ambition. 

§ 134. Opacd’Bovdov rov Kod- 
utéa] Dict. Biogr. Thrasybu- 
lus, no. 5. This namesake and 
associate of the more eminent 
Thrasybulus (no. 4, 6 Advdxou, 
Zrecpeds) is usually distinguish- 
ed by the name of his deme, 
omitted in the case of the other. 
He may easily have been iden- 
tical with the son of Thraso, 
who procured the removal of 
Alcibiades from his command 
after the battle of Notium (no, 
3): and, as Dindorf and Clinton 
hold, with the Thrasybulus men- 
tioned among pijropes évdoéo Kal 
péyaro. de Cor. p. 301 § 219. 
The great Thrasybulus had also 
a son of the same name, whose 
condemnation to a fine of ten 
talents affords Demosth. ano- 
ther example, together with a 
descendant of ‘ Harmodius and 
Aristogiton’ (!), of the impar- 
tiality of Athenian justice, de 
F. L. p. 431 § 280=320. Ano- 
ther Thrasybulus of Collytus 
is mentioned as an ambassador 
to Thebes in Aeschin. Ctes. 
§ 138 : he must have been a con- 
temporary of Aeschines and De- 
mosthenes, and clearly different 
from the man now before us.— 
The form Kodurrevs is attested 
only by 2, Koddureds by the 
MSS. of other authors besides 
Demosth. This is just a case 
where inscriptions help us: and 


those printed in Ross’s Demen 
von Attika and Rhangabé’s An- 
tiquités Helléniques (about six 
in all) agree in the form Ko\Xv- 
TeUS. 

kpOévra duporépas Tas Kploecs] 
‘condemned on both occasions.’ 
For xplvew = xaraxpivew cf. 
[Demosth.] wept radv mpds ’AXEE- 
avdpov p. 215 § 12 rovs pév xe- 
Kptmévous év Tois dtxacrnplos 
apiévres: de Cor. Trierarch. 
p. 1230 § 9 @avdrov xpivarres. 

Tov éx Ileparas cal ard Bvdjs] 
This became a stock phrase for 
the liberators of Athens from 
the Thirty. The seizure of 
Phyle by Thrasybulus is first 
mentioned Xen. Hell. 11. 4 § 2: 
the night march to the Peiraeus, 
the next step in the recovery of 
the city, ibid. § 10. Xenophon 
observes the same distinction of 
prepositions as the present pas- 
sage: the same men are called 
of awd Pudfjs §§ 10, 12, and after 
they had established themselves 
ot é€x Tod Ilecpaids §§ 25, 26. (In 
the intervening §§ 19, 23 oi év 
Ilecpae? are those who held the 
place in the oligarchical interest 
against the liberators.) Com- 
pare Grote ch. 65, Vol. v. p. 585, 
where the passages related to 
Phyle are collected in a note. 

Piréyrov rov Aaumrpéa] The 
man is not mentioned else- 
where: his deme Lamptra was 
also that of Archebius the trier. 
arch, § 11 n. 

’Ayuppiov tov KodXuréa] It 


I 


o 


200 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 135-137. 


v ‘ \ \ 
piov Tov Koddvréa, advdpa’ xpnotov Kai SnporiKxor 
\ \ \ a aS ORE ory \ 5 , “ 
Kal wept TO TAHOOS TO VueTEpOV TOAAG OTOVOATAVTA 
’ “ \ +.<5 na 
GAN bas Tos vomous weTto Seiv Kal avTOS éxEivos 
¢ / e/ > \ an ? / ef \ > 3? 
Opoiws, womep él Tois advvaTous, ovTW Kal éh 
a a ee , 
éavT@® ioyvew, Kal éyéveTo ev THO oLKNMATL TOUT 
ae v4 \ , 3 / X £5 a 
moAXa éTn, Ews TA YpHNpaTa améticev a EdokE THS 
morews ovTa éxew" Kai ex éxelvp Kaddiotpatos 
' hae x | ARS Ne Manes ats | t 
Suvapevos Kal aderdidods @v avTod ovK éTiOeL vo- 
ey fal) 
poous, Kat Mupwvidns o ’Apyxivov vids Tod Katada- 


* dvdpa cal Z Bens. cum ZTOQr, 


suits Demosthenes’ argument 
to represent him as ‘an honest 
man, and one of popular sym- 
pathies;’ Snuaywyav ovros ovK 
apavys, Harpocrat. s.v. The 
nature of his debts to the public 
may be gathered from Andoc. 
de Myst. § 133, where he is de- 
scribed ironically as xadds karya- 
Ads and as an apxévys, or chief 
among the reAGva, driving hard 
bargains with the treasury. If 
he was really the originator of 
the distribution of the Theo- 
ric fund among the people, as 
Harpocration states, and in- 
creased the picbds éxxAnoacTt- 
xds to three obols (Dict. Biogr. 
s.v.), he might well be called 
wept Td WAHOOs Td VmeTEpor TOAAG 
orovddcoarra. 

$135. émi rots dduvdros] ‘in 
the case of the uninfluential’ or 
humble. A more usual sense is 
that of ‘invalids’ or infirm pau- 
pers, for which see Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. ‘Adynati.’ 

éyévero...toAdd &@ryn] Doubt- 
less an exaggeration, like mo)- 
Aas wevreryplias § 125, where 
see the note. 

én’ éxeivw] K. translates ‘in 
his favour,’ having just ren- 
dered the word ‘against.’ The 
sense ‘applying to,’ as in §§ 18, 


59, covers both these meanings. 

KadXlorparos| The well-known 
orator, son of Callicrates of 
Aphidna (no, 4 in Dict. Biogr.). 
His fate has been already touch- 
ed upon, Androt. § 66 n. He 
was nephew of Agyrrhius by 
the mother’s side, as Benseler 
rightly infers: as his brother’s 
son he would of course have 
been of the same deme. 

kal Mupwyridns o ’Apxivov] We 
must supply éyévero év oixnuare 
rovrw. Nothing further is re- 
corded of this Myronides: his 
father is a man of whom we 
would gladly know more, It is 
remarked in Dict. Biogr. 8.yv. 
Archinus, with reference to the 
present passage: ‘Although the 
name of Archinus is obscured 
in history by that of Thrasybu- 
lus, yet we have every reason 
for believing that he was a 
better and a greater man.’ The 
same writer (Mr Elder) makes 
the probable suggestion, in 
which he is followed by R. W., 
that he may have been the son 
of Myronides who won the battle 
of Oenophyta in s.c. 456, and 
that this Myronides may have 
been named after his grand- 
father according to the very com- 
mon custom (s. v. Myronides). 


137 


P. 743. ] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


201 


> / 
Bivros Durnv kal peta ye Tovs Oeodvs aitiwtatov 
~ ” w \ 
évtos THS KaOddSov TO Syuw Kal adda TOAdA Kal 
U 
KANG TETOALTEULEVOU Kal EaTPATNYNKOTOS TOANAKLS. 
> 7. ¢) e ¢€ / \ f \ £ 
GXN Opws AtravTes OVTOL UTEMEVOV TOUS VOMOUS. Kal Ob 


tala eb dv 6 Ormicbodopos éverrpncOn, Kai ot TOV 743 


ths Ocod Kal of Tév adArov Oedr, ev TH oOiKnpmaTe 
ToTw haav, Ews % Kplows avTois éyévero. Kal ot 
mept tov airov abdskeiv Soares, Kal aXot TOAXOl, 
& advdpes Sixactal, wdvtes Bedtiovs ‘Avdpotiwvos 


v 
OVTES. 


§ 136. raula...oi rav rys 
Oeov] sc. xpnudrwr, and so =év 
axporé\e. § 129. The phrase 
occurs in a law ap. Demosth. c. 
Macart. p. 1075 § 71. 

6 Orie Obdou0s] Unquestion- 
ably the inner or western cella 
of the Parthenon itself, though 
other temples of Athena have 
been suggested (Boeckh, P. EF. 
p. 441f.).’ The existing struc- 
ture of the Parthenon bears, it 
is believed, no traces of rebuild- 
ing after a fire: but the damage 
may after all have been slight, 
as éverpncbn need only imply 
‘set on fire’ not ‘burnt down’ 
(xaraxavoév, Thucyd. tv. 30 § 2: 
apbévra kat xarapdexbévra ib. 
133 § 2). The conflagration is 
not mentioned elsewhere: the 
account of it by the Scholiast 
Ulpian is amusing, if of doubtful 
authenticity. The vauia, he 
tells us, had lent the sacred 
treasure to the bankers on their 
own account: the banks subse- 
quently broke (érvxev torepov 
dvarpamnvat Tas tpaméfas), and 
the rauiac set the temple on fire 
in the hope of concealing the 
transaction! If we may trust 
the author of the speech zepi 
ovvrdéews, the Athenians, on 
any suggestion that the trea- 


D \ 
€iTa TOUTOLS péev 


7> / \ , 
€0€L KUplovs TOUS TWarat 


sures of the Opisthodomos had 
been tampered with, forgot their 
usual humanity (avéwiay dyrov 
mpwnv Twes Tov’ Oris Oddouor.. .wa- 
aTiyobv, orpeBrouv mavres éBowr, 
Aéyoures Tov Syuov KaTradiecOau, 
p. 170 § 14). 

ws 4 Kploits avrois éyévero] 
This is quite natural. But 
‘penal servitude,’ and the Bas- 
tilles or state prisons of arbi- 
trary governments in modern 
times, were, I repeat, unknown 
to the Athenians. 

wept rov cirov dd.Kety] i.e. by 
‘forestalling and regrating,’ as 
to which the political economy 
of the Athenians was as back- 
ward as that of modern Europe, 
including England, until quite 
recent times. See Lys. Or. 22 
kara TOV oiroTwA\wy passim, and 
especially § 6, rév véuov bs ama- 
yopeter pniédva twv év TH mWbdee 
mwrelw citov mwevTjKovTa dopudv 
cvvwveicbar. Also Boeckh P. EF. 
bk. 1. c. 15, who observes in 
note 375 that the gopuds was 
probably not very different from 
the medimnus. The penalty 
was death; as also ef tis oixwv 
"AOnyyotv GXoce ot oiTNynoELEV 
4h els rd ’Arrixdy éurédpiov, De- 
mosth. adv. Phorm. p. 918 § 37, 
adv, Lacr. p. 941 § 50, Lycurg. 


202 KATA TIMOKPATOYS.  [§ 138. 


, ’ ts \ / / ? \ 
KeLwevous vosous eivat, Kal dedwxévas Sikny avTovs 
\ \ ene Q : 29 / \ 
KaTa Todvs vrapyovtas vopmous’ be “Avdpotiwva oé 
cat [Xaveétrnyv cat Medravwrrov xawor det yevér Par 
t ae ' 8 \ ! , \ 
vomov, TOS HA@KOTAaS® Kal >Andw KEKpluevous KATA 
/ 
Tovs Taat KEywévous Vom“ous Kal SdEavtas Exew iepa 
, \ eo § 3 > / f ¢ 
YPHUATA Kal OoLa; ElT OU KaTayédaaTos Sokes H 
TONS Elval, EL TOIS lEepoo’AOLS, bTwWS TwONnCOYTAL, 
an > 
138 vopov daveitar TiOeuevn; Eywy oipat. pen Toivuv 
pp 4 ¢ a b] \ ¢ / \ \ / 
édonte vas avtovs UBpilecOar pondé tHv ToAuL, 
ara prncbévtes OTe EvSnuov tov Kuda0nvara* vo- 
pov dofavta Oeivas ovK« émurndecov, ov Tara, GAN’ 


8 Sia Tovs €akwxoras Z Bekk. Bens. cum libris. 
t -aiéa Z Bekk. 


c. Leocr. § 27. Boeckh, whose 
book was first published in 1817, 
calls these restrictions ‘judi- 
cious, P. E.p. 81. Prof. Ma- 
haffy, Social Life in Greece p. 
403 ff., criticises the Athenian 
corn laws in the true spirit of 
political economy. Comp. above, 
§ 63 n. 

§ 137. dedwxévar dixyvy] The 
perf. inf. is rare after 25, which 
like debebam, oportebat usually 
takes the pres. inf. of past 
events; but it serves to mark 
the time more distinctly: ‘ was 
it right that the old-established 
laws should be in operation for 
these persons—that they should 
have suffered punishment.’ K. 

KaTa& Tous vrdpxovras vduous] 
These words are certainly super- 
fluous, as Dobree argues, after 
Tovs Keiuévous véuous. But tau- 
tology is not unfrequently a 
form of emphasis; and the 
phrase is repeated a third time 
below. 

rovs jAwkéras}] The MSS. 
agree in dia Tovs éadwxédras. 
Dindorf alone among editors 
follows Dobree in expunging 


dca, and writes 7Awxéras accord- 
ing to his invariable rule. Above, 
§ 77. 

§ 138. py Tolvur édonre...uv7n- 
obévres...Tabtny Thv dpynv Kal 
viv éwt rovrovt AdBere] This 
long sentence is rightly broken 
up into three by K. ‘Do not 
then allow yourselves or the 
commonwealth to be insulted. 
Remember that, &c. Bear this 
in mind, and show the same 
spirit now against the defend- 
ant.’ Above, § 36 n. 

Kvia@nvacé] This, the true 
Attic form, is found in no MS., 
but Kvda0nvéa the reading of = 
and one other is a vestige of it. 
Cobet lays down the rule in 
several passages of his Var. 
Lect.: in p. 326 he writes ‘ Apol- 
lonius Dyscolus de Pron. p. 126 
Bekk. ’Arrixol EvBods paciv, at 
non in Codd. nostris:’ ef. pp. 
124,154. The form Ilepacé is 
regularly preserved by the copy- 
ists; but they seem to have 
thought this word exceptional, 
and. in the genitive vary be- 
tween Ilecpaéws and Ilepaws, 
whereas the rule of contraction 


P. 743.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTYS. 


203 


’ , f- 
éx Evdvépouv dpyovtos, amexteivate, Kat Pidurmov 
na / a 
Tov Dirimrov tod vavKAnpov vidv piKpod pév arre- 
U Lal n 
KTelvaTe, YpnuaTav Sé TOAAGY avTOD ExelvoU aYTLTL- 
/ > ~~ 7 Ud > , Vv ¢ 
pwpévov Tap orLyas Whndous éTiunoate’, TavTHV 
> rn \ a \ 
THY Opynv Kal viv émt TovToVvi NaPeTe, exeivo TpdS 
/ 3 
Tovto.s amacw évOvpnOévtes, Ti mor av émabeTe 


Y ariywwoare Bekk. cum libris praeter >. 


is general for nouns in evs prae- 
cedente vocali. 

ér’ Evdvipov dpxovros] Ol. 
99, 3=B.c. 382—1. The muti- 
lated speech of Lysias against 
Evander, Or. 26, was written 
for a speaker who attempted to 
prove on the doxiuacia that he 
was ineligible. The Athenian 
constitution, like the American 
in presidential elections, pro- 
vided a ‘reserve man;’ Leoda- 
mas drew the first lot, Evan- 
der éré\aye: the former was 
rejected on the scrutiny, Evan- 
der though opposed was suc- 
cessful. Cf. Jebb, Att. Or. 1. 
242. 

Pidirrov Tov Pitlamov Tod vav- 
kAnpov] The father is mention- 
ed in the speech adv. Timoth. 
p. 1188 § 14 ff. 

map’ dryas Yhpous érynnoare] 
It is not too much to say that 
the reading here preserved by 
MS. = contra mundum is the 
only one which explains the 
whole passage clearly and con- 
sistently. The sense of zap’ 
é\lyas Ypouvs has been esta- 
blished on Androt. § 3 and is 
the key to the rest. Having 
mentioned the case of Eudemus 
who was actually put to death, 
the orator goes on to that of 
Philip, who very nearly («cxpod) 
underwent the same penalty. 
When the defendant offered to 
pay a heavy fine as an alterna- 
tive (avritiuwuévov) ‘you by a 


narrow majority assessed the 
penalty (at the sum named by 
him).’ So Benseler: ‘mit ge- 
ringer Mehrheit um eine grosse 
Summe straftet.’ This usage 
of map’ o\yas once misunder- 
stood, ériujcare was sure to be 
altered. According to the read- 
ing #riwwdoare, the choice of the 
jury lay between Atimia de- 
manded by the prosecutor and 
the sum offered by the defend- 
ant; ‘you were within a few 
votes of disfranchising him.’ 
The fact that the defendant’s 
proposal was accepted remains 
the same; but upon this view 
what becomes of ptxpod pév 
arexrelvare ? 

G. H. Schaefer read éripy- 
care, but from not perceiving 
the sense of zap’ d\iyas has 
missed the meaning of the pas- 
sage: ‘per pauca suffragia stet- 
isse quominus ingenti pecunia 
reus multaretur;’ whereas the 
fine was carried. It is a well- 
known rule of Attic law that the 
jury had to choose one or other 
of the two propositions of the 
plaintiff and defendant, and 
were not at liberty to mediate 
between them. Hence the latter 
would in general fear to irritate 
his judges, as Socrates did, by 
putting the damages too low 
(Plato, Apol. 388; Xen. Apol. 
§ 23). This rule is well dis- 
cussed by Kennedy, App. xii. to 
Select Speeches ; he shows that 


204 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 139, 140. 


Co 5k , > 8 a PS t eS 
vuTO TOUVTOUV AUTOV, €b OVTOS els @V émpéa Bevev UTep . 


buav. olfpar yap TovodTov ovdev elvat btov dv aré- 

oxeTo. opate 88 rv Svavoiay avtod’ 6 yap vopos, ov 

érérpnoe Ocivar, Tov TpoTrov avTod Seixvucty. 
BovAopat 8 vpiv, @ avdpes Sixactal, év Aoxpots 


e a) ’ a sQO\ \ / »” 
ws vopoberovar Sinynoacbar’ ovdév yap yelpous éce- 


/ U , / wv EM, Ud 
oe mwapaderypa Te aKnKOOTES, AAdws TE Kal @ TOMS 744 


it was rendered necessary by 
the immense numbers of Athe- 
nian juries. It prevailed also 
in civil actions, which however 
might be settled at any moment 
by arrangement between the 
parties even after the trial had 
begun. 

émrpésBevev] The reading of 
three of the minor MSS. and 
of the Scholiast érpésBevoer is 
worth more attention than it 
has received. The sense re- 
quired is ‘if he had been your 
ambassador,’ not ‘if he were 
now:’ and it is in keeping with 
érddere. On els dv it is worth 
noticing that such a contingency 
never in fact occurred: we ne- 
ver read of a single ambassador, 
at least from Athens. There 
were always at least two, some- 
times, as in the embassy to 
Philip, immortalised by Demo- 
sthenes and Aeschines, as many 
as ten. According to a story 
told by Plutarch, de Garrul. 
p. 511 a, king Demetrius (ap- 
parently Poliorcetes) expressed 
surprise at receiving only a 
single ambassador from Sparta: 
the laconic answer was, “Eva 
mort éva. But in Thucyd. 1. 
67 the Spartan embassy to 
Persia consists of three envoys, 
besides representatives of their 
allies. 

rowvrov ovdey elva] The 
order of these three words va- 


ries in the MSS., but all preserve 
Towodrov as the neuter form. 
Cf. Androt. § 2 n. 

§§ 139—143. The well-known 
story illustrating the perma- 
nence of the laws (of Zaleucus) 
at Locriin Italy, contrasted with 
the incessant legislative changes 
at Athens, under the influence 
of the orators and for their sole 
benefit. 

§ 139. dddws Te Kal @] ie. 
mapadelypart, ‘especially an ex- 
ample which a well-governed 
state follows.’ The good go- 
vernment of Locri is attested 
by Pindar, Ol. x. 17 véwec yap 


"Atpéxeca mok\w Aoxpdv Legu- 


ptwv, and by Plato, Tim. 20 4 
Tiuatds re yap bd¢, evdvouwrdrns 
av mbdews THs év Iradla Aoxpldos. 
It need hardly be said that the 
spirit of Zaleucus was as diffe- 
rent as possible from that of 
Bentham: ‘ order’ in the sense 
of Metternich and the Czar 
Nicholas, not individual hap- 
piness, is what is meant by 
evvoula. His laws were severe 
(Zarevcov vouos* émt trav dro- 
Tépwv, Zenob. Cent. rv. 10, also 
in Diogenian. Cent. tv. 94) and 
anti-commercial (Aoxpéy ovr- 
Ojxat, Zenob. Cent. v. 4). The 
date 660 B.c. for this legislation, 
given by Eusebius, is accepted 
by Clinton F. H. snb anno: 
the foundation of the city was 
perhaps fifty years earlier, 


140 


Pp. 744] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 205 


a na \ a 
evvopoupéevn Ypntat. €Kket yap ovTws olovtaL Sei 
Tols maAae Keiévors ypnolar™ vomols Kal Ta TaTpLAa 

\ \ \ ‘ \ \ 
TepicTéAre Kal pn pos Tas BovdAncets unde pcs 
al , lal fi 
ras Svaddcets’ THv abixnuatwov” vomobereicbat, dot 
+7 , / \ / > / \ 
éav Tis BovAnTal vomov Katvov TLOEvat, ev Bpoyw Tov 
/ ” @ Lal S's \ Py / \ \ 
TpaXxnrov EXWY voLOUETEL, KAL EUV MEV o&y KaXos Kal 
ma € 
KpHnTywLos elvat 6 vopos, Ff o TiOeis Kal amépyerat, 
dé ur), TEOvNKEY ErLaTradOEvTOS TOU Bpoyov. Kai yap 
ToL KawWovs pev OU TOAMAGL TIOEcPaL Vomous*, Tois 
‘ / a n a 
dé wadae Keipévors axpiBas xpavTat. TOANOLS 
\ / ” ¢ A é Py \ e / > 
dé wavu étecw, @ avopes Sixactal, cis NéyeTar Tap 


év” 


avtots vouos Kavos TeOnvat. 


x xpnoacba Z cum =. 
xnoavTew Bekk. e coni. Saupp. 
DksA’.. 


ovrws olovra] ‘so strong is 
their conviction,’ R. W., ‘steht 
der Grundsatz so fest,’ Benseler. 

Ta warpia meporédAdrev] ‘ that 
they ought to cherish their 
hereditary institutions, and that 
there should be no legislation 
to please individuals or for easy 
compromise with crime.’ For 
the sense of wepioré\X\ew cf. pro 
Phorm. p. 958 § 47 koopety kal 
mepioré\Xew explained by Paley 
and Sandys. There can be little 
doubt that vouobere?cAa is pas- 
sive and impersonal: as a dep. 
middle it is not found in the 
Orators, and is rare in Plato 
(Rep. ur. 398 B, Laws v. 736 c). 

The rendering just given fol- 
lows Benseler in preferring the 
reading duad’cers for diadvcecs, 
as not only supported by = and 
most MSS§. (a point of minor 
importance when the difference 
is only between A and A), but 
in every way more appropriate. 
As might be expected, the words 
are constantly interchanged in 


Y Scadt’oes Bens. cum SF YOrv. 


b kal év Z Bens. cum  &. 


” \ af , 
dvToOs yap avTobe vo- 


= didu- 
® youous om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum 


the MSS. as in § 94 above, 
where tay wap ui movnpwr 
divadvoes ‘ shifts’ or ‘ evasions,’ 
is the right word as applied to 
persons, diadvces, an ill-sup- 
ported variant. Hence Sauppe, 
whom Bekker follows in his 
last edition, conjectured déi«y- 
cdvtwy for déiixnudrwy in the 
present passage. This is un- 
necessary, since diadvces Tov 
adicnudrwy here yields an ex- 
cellent sense: didAvois is used 
of any settlement or compro- 
mise, especially upon amicable 
terms, as of a reconciliation be- 
tween enemies, c. Mid. p. 553 
§ 119; acomposition of a money 
claim, c. Nausim. p. 988 § 13, 
c. Spud. p. 1032 § 16. 

TéOvnxev| ‘the noose is drawn 
to, and he dies at once,’ ‘is a 
dead man.’ On this use of the 
perfect see Madvig, Synt. $171: 
and a note on Plat, Protag. 328 s. 

§ 140. dxpiBas xpavrac] ‘keep 
strictly to.’ In omitting vé- 
ous, the Zurich Kditors and 


lanl 


14 


142 


206 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 141—143. 


\ ‘ ‘ 

pov, éav Tis odOarpov éexxo tn, avtexxowar Tapa- 

a a / / > 
oyxely TOV EaVTOD, Kal OV YPNMaToY TLnTEwWS ovbE- 

a > lal / / > 0 \ > a a cd + 
pds, aTrevAHoal Tis AéyeTat EyOpods evOpe@ Eva eyovTt 
, \ ¢ b) mn uD / A \ e 
opOarmov bri avTod exo es TovTOV TOV eva. ryEvo- 
‘ lal NY lal lal b] \ c 
pévns S€ TavTns Tis ames yareTas eveyKoV Oo 
e / \) 2£ U > / ¢ a » \ 
eTepopOadpos, Kal rjyoupevos aBiwTov avT@ eivar TOV 
Biov rodro twaQovTt, NéyeTat TOAMHoaL VvomoY eice- 

lal » Ja! 7 +” > ‘ b] / wv 

veyKely, €ay Ts Eva Exovtos opOarpov éxxdwy, adudw 
> , tad 7 a + a > / 
avTexkowat Tapacyxel, wa TH ion cuupopa apdo- 


TEpOL YP@VTAL. 


/ \ / >? lal x / 7 
GécOat Tov vopov év mreEty % SvaKocios ETEcw. 


Benseler as usual follow = more 
closely than Bekker and Din- 
dorf. 

dvrexxbWat twapacxely Tov éav- 
rod] ‘he should allow his own 
eye to be knocked out in re- 
turn.’ For the act. infin. after 
mapacxeiv in this sense cf. Thu- 
cyd. vitt. 50 § 5 Sri dXov To orpa- 
Teyua TO Tov AOnvalwy éroipos 
eln twapacxetv aurois diapbeipat. 
Violent blinding is always ex- 
pressed by éxxérrewv: the phrase 
in Demosth. e. Conon. p. 1269 
§ 39 ’Apicroxpdryny Tov rods d¢- 
Oauods StepOappévov was for- 
merly quoted in illustration of 
the xapaviornpes dpParpwptxor 
of Aesch. Eum, 186, but is now 
rightly explained of a man who 
had bad or diseased eyes. Such 
a law could never have obtained 
in the more civilized parts of 
Greece : these and all other mu- 
tilations were regarded as Orien- 
tal, utterly abhorrent to Greek 
manners, 

od xpnudTwv Tinioews ovde- 
pas] sc. ofons, which is easily 
supplied from évros above. 

§ 141. 6 érepd¢Oadrpos] The 
story told by Aelian, V. H. x11. 
24, whether true or not, shows 
the curious notions held in an- 


\ a / / \ 
Kal TOUTOV movoy éyovtar AoKpot 


e 
Ol 


cient times as to literal com- 
pliance with the law. Accord- 
ing to this, the penalty of adul- 
tery was the loss of the eyes: 
and the son of Zaleucus having 
become liable to this penalty, 
the father submitted to the loss 
of one eye that his son might 
not be utterly blind. The same 
story is told by Valerius Maxi- 
mus, v. 5 § 3. 

avT@ elvac Tov Blovy] The vary- 
ing order of these words in the 
MSS. may justify a suspicion 
that rov Biov was originally 
absent, and dBiwrov used abso- 
lutely as in Kur. Ion 670 dBiw- 
Tov juiy. Both constructions 
were in use; dPiwrov elvai mo 
merotnke Tov Blov Aristoph. Plut. 
969, Karakovda wév ovv aBloros 
Biov Eur. Hipp. 821, dStoros Biov 
Tvxa id. 867. 

tovroa maddvri] The parti- 
ciple of course expresses an ‘if:’ 
the assault had not yet been 
committed. 

év mreiv 7 Siaxoclos érecw] 
wréov X, mreloow ceteri. The 
Attic form «iv (before 4) is 
well known to readers of Aristo- 
phanes and the Comic Frag- 
ments, where it has been pro- 
tected by the metre, but has 


143 


P. 745. ] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 207 


\ Sige al CaF > af \ a \ 
dé rap’ nuiv pyntopes, @ dvdpes Stxactal, TpwTov peév 
¢, al rn / a al 
OTOL pHves piKpod Séovot vomobeTEiy Ta adTOIs TUpL- 

\ ? / \ 
hépovTa, met avTOL Mev TOUS LOLwTas Eis TO Secpo- 
7 ” bl] > e n ] > 
THplov ayovoww, OTav apywow, fp Eavtois 8 ovK 
A a 3 \ 
olovtat deity TavTO SixaLov TOUT Eivas’ ErELTA TOUS 
an \ 
pev TOD YoAwvos Vomous, TOUS TAaXaL SedoKipacpEévous, 

e ’ a a 
ols of mpoyovor EOevTo, AVovatv avTol, Tots O EavTar, 

“A ? pI iO / an a bé fal 0 € fal 
ods én abdukia THs TOdEws TLHéacl, ypnobar vpuds 


olovtTat Seiv. 


disappeared from prose, as Cobet 
tells us Var. Lect. p. 237, Nov. 
Lect. p. 622, except in one pas- 
sage of a single manuscript. 
This is Demosth. de F. L. p. 
413 § 230=255, where = alone 
has preserved m\eciv 4 muplovs. 
Acting on this hint, Dindorf 
has ‘raised the standard’ (sig- 
num sustulit) of revolt against 
the MSS. and has corrected 
many passages in Demosth. of 
which Cobet gives a list: ec. 
Lept. p. 503 § 152 mrety 7 dak, 
ce. Mid. p. 570 § 173 whew 7 
mévre TadavTa, ¢. Aristocr. p. 
657 § 10 wreiv 7 TpiaKxdo.a Td- 
Navra, p. 669 $149 wrei 7H rpia 
érn (scribendum tpi’ érn Cobet) 
and seven other passages in the 
private orations. II\éov (reov, 
mieiv) and é@\atrov (uetov) are 
used indeclinably before all 
cases : we have here an example 
with the dative, and one with 
genitive 11. Aphob. p. 841 § 18 
mwhetv 4 Oéka TaddvTwy.—éd.aKo- 
clos éreow need not be taken to 
imply that no more than 200 
years had elapsed between Zaleu- 
cusand Demosthenes: seeabove. 

§ 142. dco prves] Jerome 
Wolf observes that this is like 
boat Tuépa, usually written oon- 
wépat. G. H. Schaefer adds 


el ovV pu) TLUwWpPHaEDOe TOUTOUS, OUK av 
pOavot 76 TAHGos TovToLs Tots Onpious Sovdedor. 


€v 


éroca (6oa L. Dindorf) éry Xen. 
Rep, Ath. 3 § 4, which Cobet 
writes also as one word dcérn, 
Nov. Lect. p. 747. In Horace’s 
quotquot eunt dies a verb is sup- 
plied, 

pxpod déovor vouobereiy] An- 
drot. §68n. The personal use 
of déw (want) is not very rare 
except in the 2nd sing. dels. 
The expression is equivalent to 
‘they are passing laws almost 
every month.’ 

ép éavrois &é...rod7r eivac] 
‘though against themselves they 
do not think it right that this 
same principle should hold,’ 
R. W., ‘do not choose the same 
measure of justice to be applied 
to themselves,’ K. 

Nvovew avrol] ‘repeal of their 
own authority.’ §§ 38, 123. 

§ 143. ov ay Odva...5ov- 
Aedor] ‘it will not be long before 
they become the slaves of these 
monsters,’ cf. 1. Aristog. p. 782 
§ 40 wor’ ovk dv POdvo Kara- 
korréuevos. b0dvew with. a ne- 
gative is used of that which 
when it takes place will not 
take place too soon (Madvig, 
Synt. § 177 Rem, 6). The third 
person occurs in several pas- 
sages of the orators: Demosth. 
c. Macart. p. 1073 § 69 ov« pO 


745 


208 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 144, 145. 


S tore, & avdpes Sixactal, bre éav pev ahddp’ opyi- 

e > lol a be \ \ \ 

Enode, nTTOv ageNyavovaty, av Sé py, TOAXOVS Tors 

> val ¢ / \ ‘ e / ¢ fal ’ t al 

doenyeis evpnoete Kat Tovs VBplfovtas vuds emt TH 
Tov piroTipetobar mpopacer. 

"Iva Sé kal rept éxeivou elm Tov vomou, & avdpes 

p 

Sicactal, @ adKkovw pmédrew Trapadelypatt ypnolar 

es \ , oy 2 A , > 

TovTov Kal dycew akddovOov avT@ TeOetkévat, ev 

évt “ovde Snow “AOnvalwy ovdéva, ds dv éeyyuntas 


Ocdroutros Thy émtdixaclay rovn- 
oduevos...xal évedeléatro, ‘he had 
no sooner made good his claim 
to the inheritance than he show- 
ed (by bad husbandry) that he 
did not think it really his own.’ 
c. Theocrin. p. 1319 § 65 ov yap 
&pOn po cvpBaoa y arvxla, Kal 
evdds... ToUTWY Tives.. Erexelpn- 
cay Suadopnoa tavdobev. Isocr, 
Paneg. § 86 of & ovx @p@acav 
mvObpevot...Kal...qKov huly dpv- 
vevvtes, Hvag. § 53 ovx &pbacav 
aAAnrots TAHodoavTEes Kal Tepl 
melovos éroincavto spas avrous. 
The second person in the phrase 
ovk dv d@dvos ‘you cannot do 
it too soon’ and so, equivalent 
to an imperative, ‘do it at once,’ 
is common in the tragedians: 
Mr Whiston on the present pas- 
sage refers to Eur. Alc. 662, 
Heracl. 720, Troad. 456. A 
prose example is Xen. Mem, 11. 
3 § 11 ovk av POdvors Aé&ywv et 
Tt joOnoal pe pittpoy émord- 
pevov. 

The word @npiov is freely ap- 
plied by the orators in invec- 
tives: Demosth.c, Phorm. extr., 
c. Lacrit. p. 925 §8. Aeschin, 
de F. L. § 20, c. Ctes. § 182. 
Cicero goes a step further in 
the use of the vocative case: 
his speech against Piso, in its 
present defective condition, be- 
gins with the words ‘ Iamne yi- 
des, belua, iamne sentis...?’ 


él TH TOO ditorimetoOat mpo- 
gaoe] ‘under the pretence of 
zeal in your service,’ K., ‘ of 
patriotic ambition,’ Benseler 
more literally. 

§§ 144—-151. Anticipation of 
an objection which he hears Ti- 
mocrates is about to make—that 
his law is in accordance with 
Athenian maxims respecting per- 
sonal freedom and aversion to 
arbitrary imprisonment, as shown 
by an existing law in which the 
words occur ‘Nor will I im- 
prison any Athenian who shall 
put in three substantial sure- 
ties, except in cases of treason- 
able conspiracy, or default on 
the part of tax-farmers,’ The 
clause is really found in the oath 
taken by members of the Senate, 
and its object is to check oppres- 
sive action by those in authority 
against untried prisoners, lest 
they should be at a disadvantage 
in preparing their defence. It 
does not refer to those tried 
and convicted, as may easily be 
proved by reading the Oath of 
the Heliasts. ['The oath is read.] 
You don’t find here, men of the 
jury, ‘Nor will I put any 
Athenian in bondage.’ 

§ 144, rapadelyuare xpnobae 
...TEeckévac] ‘to quote for a pre- 
cedent, and say that he has 
proposed his own in conformity 
with it,’ K. 


145 


p.745.]) KATA TIMOKPATOTS.. 209 


“rpeis xabiotH TO avTO TédXOS TEAODYTAS, TANV EaV 
“ ae Se / a t Re 2FN Ul a 
TLS ETL mT podocla THS TOAEWS ETL KATAAVGEL TOV 
“ , ‘ ¢ n x + Cc / x > 
dn 0U TVVL@V AA, N TEAOS TL® TpLaweEevos 7H €yyuN- 
\ Ud > > lA 
“ gdpevos 7) eKACYOV py) KaTAaBAAy,” aKov’caTé pov 
\ \ , i ’ \ St eS ee 5 y 
Kal wept TovTov’ ov yap ép@ btt avtos ’Avdpotiwv 
\ » / a 
nyev eis TO SeopoTnpLov Kal dec ToVTOV KeLevou TOD 
a ¢ / 2 
vopmov, GAN éd ois Keitat 6 vopmos obTOS, SidaEw bpas. 
\ ? n 
oUTos yap, © avdpes Sikactal, ovn él Tois Kexpime- 
/ tal > ] a 
vous Kab Hyovicpévols KEiTaL, AX’ eri Tois aKpiToss, 


¢ r, om. Z. Bekk, Bens. cum SF v. 


TO avTo Tédos TeAOUYTAas] SC. 
avir@, of the same class with 
himself, and therefore paying 
according to the same valu- 
ation: a safeguard against put- 
ting in ‘men of straw,’ the 
gatrous dvOpwrous of §85, This 
is doubtless said in reference 
to the classes into which the 
citizens were divided in the ar- 


chonship of Nausinicus, when 


the elogopa was placed upon a 
new footing, and the ovpmoplac 
introduced. For fuller details 
see references, Androt. § 44 n. 
I do not think the Scholiast 
was guilty of the absurdity 
which Mr Whiston imputes to 
him, of taking the passage to 
mean that the collective pro- 
perty of the three sureties was to 
be equal to that of the defendant. 
His words are rwy rpiwy éyyuy- 
tev éxdvTwv Thy tonv ovctav éxel- 
ve Orep éyyvevrar: his meaning 
would have been clearer if he 
had said éxévrwy éxacrov, but I 
believe he understood the ex- 
pression in the same sense in 
which modern scholars have 
taken it. 

guvidv GA@] ‘is discovered in 
a conspiracy,’ R. W., or perhaps 
‘arrested,’ as in Androt. § 53. 
Cf. above $105n. This is better 


W. D. 


than the rendering of K. and 
Benseler, ‘convicted of conspi- 
racy,’ ‘schuldig befunden.’ As 
Schoemann pointed out, the 
context clearly shows that the 
reference is to untried prisoners: 
and G. H. Schaefer, in objecting 
to this ‘Sed dAéva, quod sciam, 
non dicitur dxpiros,’ unquestion- 
ably narrows too much the usage 
of the verb. 

n Tédos Te mpiduevos] Once 
more, as in § 40, we have the 
three classes of persons con- 
nected with the farming of 
taxes and, as such, liable to 
special penalties. On éx\éywy 
see also Androt. § 48 n. 

§ 145. ov yap ép&...vduov] ‘I 
will say nothing (though I 
might) of Androtion’s taking 
people to prison and putting 
them in bonds notwithstanding 
this law,’ K. with whom the 
German translator agrees, ‘in 
Fesseln legte.’ Rather, I should 
say, ‘arrested and imprisoned’; 
nyv is=dariyev, but é5e. need 
not by any means imply chains 
or fetters. The facts are related 
Androt. §§ 54—56. 

é¢’ ofs] masculine, ‘to what 
persons the law applies.’ §§ 18, 
59, 135, 

Kexpyévois Kal nywrionévas] 


14 


210 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 145-149. 
iva wn dia TO SedécOat yetpov avayKafowrTo ayovi- 


\ 
fec0at ) Kal TaytaTaciw arapacKevos elev. ovtoct 


Sé, a émlt tots axpitoiws Keitat, ws Tepl aTavToV 
146 eipnuéva pérAXEL Tpds vuds Aéyewv. Os O€ cadas 


, / > a eo > \ Ca > n 
yvoocrbe OTe aNNOH Ayo, eyo viv Epa. 
a 5 8 by \ Gn € n a ivf \ 
av, @ avopes Sikactal, éEnv vuiv Tysav 6 TL ypn Ta- 

a > Lal n nr 
Ociv } adtroricas (ev ydp TO Tradeiv Kal 6 Seapos eve" 

? s n ‘al , 
ovk av ovv é&jv Secpod Tiunoat), oO bcwv évdeEis 746 
/ x Lal , 
éoTiy ) aTaywy), TpoceyéypaTTo av év Tots vopols 
“roy 8 évderyOévta 7 arraxOévta SnoavTwv oi evdexa 
a ' ” By \ fal I \ 
“éy TO Evr@, elrep an EEHv AXXovs 7 TOs él Tpo- 
fol x na 
Socla THs TOAEwS 4 eml KaTAAVGEL TOD SNnwou cUVLOV- 
\ VA 
Tas }) TOUS TA TéEAN BVOUMEVOUS Kal fn KaTAaBaddODv- 
a Qn agp r 

tas Onoa. vov é Tadl vuiv Texpnpia eoTw OTL 
” a : tal \ 7 ” > x \ 
éEeote Ojnoat’ TavTedk@s yap non aKkup av Hv Ta 


4 \ 
OUTE yap 


147 


TLUNWaTa. 


‘tried and sentenced.’ dywvl- 
¢ecOa below is ‘proceed to their 
trial’ as defendants, whereas 
in § 131 it was said of prose- 
cutors. 

perder mpds buds Aéyew] For 
conjectures as to the line which 
the defence is going to take, 
compare Androt. § 8 ri dzodo- 
ylav nv mojoera, § 42 ofuar Tol- 
vuv avtov ovd’ éxeivwy adézer bar 
Tov héyuv. 

§ 146. ws 5 caddis yrioecbe] 
‘I will show you how you may 
convince yourselves of the truth 
of my statement.’ 

ovre yap av] ‘yap must often 
be construed with reference to 
a suppressed clause. ‘For if 
the defendant’s contention (viz. 
that imprisonment was foreign 
to the spirit of Attic law) had 
been true, the familiar phrase 
‘‘penalty corporal or pecuni- 
ary” (radeiy 7 dmrorioa, § 63 n.) 


” iN 2 oS 8 \ a \ 
ETT ELTA » @ AVOPES OLKADTAL, TOUTO TO 


would be simply unmeaning; 
for in imprisonment the notion 
of a corporal penalty is in- 
cluded.’ The jury is said ripay, 
to fix, assess, or award a pun- 
ishment; hence riwaécba of the 
plaintiff who ‘demands’ that 
a penalty shall be fixed is one 
among the many examples of a 
causal middle, like d:ddoKew &t- 
ddoxecOa, davelfew davelfecOar, 
and so on. 

évoettls éorw 7) dmraywyn| An- 
drot. § 26 n. bet 

Snodvrav] §10n. 

év TH E0AW] =v TH WodoKdxKy, 
§ 105 n. 

§ 147. mavred@s yap...7d Tt- 
bhwara) ‘for otherwise your pe- 
nal sentences would have been 
wholly null and void,’ i.e. ef wh 
éffv dfjoa, the suppressed clause 
indicated by ‘ydp. Dobree’s 
conjecture 67 (=‘you know’) 
for #5n is noticed by the Editors, 


148 


149 


p.746.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 211 


, Pe ess Q SEAN) sd), ch ! Neg 52 
ypdppa avTo pev Kal avTo ovK Eote vopos, TO “ ovdé 
” \ 
“Snow AOnvaiwv ovdéva,” év 5é TO Spx TH Bovrev- 
a / / \ / hae A e 
TUKO yeypaTrTat, wa pn cUVLTTapEVOL of pNTOpes ot 
b] an n \ / a tal v 
éy TH BovAn Secmov KATA TIWOS TOY TOALTOV AéyoteED. 
a ‘ \ lal ¢ 
dxupov ovy Tov dhaa tTHv BovAny tomy 6° Lorowv 
Ae ig \ / 
ToUTO Mpos TOY OpKov Tov BovAEUTLKOY Tpocéyparfer, 
¢ 
GAN ov pos TOV UuéTEpov’ aTravTwY yap KUpidTa- 
ra / 
Tov @eto Seiv eivat TO SiKacTypLov, Kal O TL yvoin, 
na en 
TOUTO TacyeElW TOV adOVTA. avayvdceTat © Vpiv av- 
a t of \ n ¢ ne @ t , 
Tod TovTou évexa TOV TOV NLaTTaV* SpKoV. eye ov. 


“OPKO® ‘HAIASTON. 
[Wndiodpat Kata Tovs vomous Kal Ta Wndicpata 


4g om. Z cum >. © 6xaorav Z Bekk. Bens. cum >. 


but no one has introduced it 
into the text: 75y (=‘at once’) 
may well be used here to ex- 
press the immediate result, as 
Mr Whiston has explained it. 

cuvicTamevot| ‘combining,’ 
nearly =cvvidvrwy ‘conspiring.’ 
Cf. rév 7Od5wv Kal cuverrnkitwv 
pyrépwv, Androt. § 37n.—)éyorev 
‘move, propose.’ 

§ 148. mpooeypayer | ‘inserted 

the clause.’ The middle mpoc- 

ypawduevos has the same mean- 
ing, Androt. § 71. In the dis- 
tinction between BovAeuTixdy and 
buérepov = SikacriKdy or nALacTi- 
xov lies the point of the orator’s 
reply to the argument of Timo- 
crates. 

§ 149. “OPKOX ‘HATAZTON] 
This, the last document inserted 
in the body of the speech, is not 
more genuine than those alrea- 
dy considered: and Westermann 
devoted three programmes(Leip- 
zig, 1859) to the exposure of its 
mistakes. From these Benseler 
extracts the following notes of 


forgery: (1) The absence of the 
clause mepl av ay vduor pen dot, 
youn TH Sixacordry xpuweiy, i.e. 
according to honour and con- 
science. That these words were 
included, is attested by c. Lept. 
p. 492 § 118, c. Aristocr. p. 652 
§ 96, Boeot. de Nom. p. 1006 
§ 40, c. Eubul. p.1318 § 63. Cf. 
Pollux vr. 122 6 & 8pkos nv Ta 
dixacrav tept av vdpor elo, on- 
preta Oat Kara Tos vomous, epi 
dé av py elol, yrmuyn TH Sexaco- 

rary. (2) The insertion of the 
absurd and unhistorical phrase 
‘not to vote tyranny,’ as if ty- 
ranny could be ‘voted’ in Athens 
or in any other Greek state. 
(3) Incorrect expressions, e.g. 
day nprodua with rept adrod and 
not in the technical sense of 
Siayypuses, ratty TH uépa for 
TH avTy nucpa [but perhaps the 
writer may not have meant this], 
éréuvunar for émduvuut, moda 
kaha kal dyad for wold Kd-yaba 
[the two last are doubtful read- 
ings]. (4) The last clause ex- 


14—2 


212 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 149, 150. 


Tov Onuov tod "AOnvaiwy Kail ths BovdAjs Tov 
mTevtakociwv, Kal TUpavvoy ov wWnpioduat elvar 
baw b] / x 909 7 , ni! n 
ovd odvyapyiav’ ovd éay tis Katadvy Tov 57- 
pov tov “A@nvaiwv 7) réyn 7 érupndifn Tapa 
TAUTA, OV TelcoMat’ OVdE TOY ypEedY TaV idiwy aTo- 


KoTras ovde yns avadacpov THS “AOnvalwy ovd oi- 
fr a \ \ , , b] \ @ / 
KLOV. OVOe TOUS hevyovTas KaTakw, ovdé Sv OavaTos 


pressed in the infin., érouvivat, 
érapacGa: and a mistake in 
the names of the gods sworn by, 
Tloce6G when it should have 
been ’A7ré\\w tarpgov. Allow- 
ing for the possible captious- 
ness of some of these objections, 
the broad fact remains that 
these documents, as a series, 
must stand or fall together; and 
it is abundantly proved that the 
orators did not, as a rule, include 
in their published speeches the 
laws or other documents which 
they caused to be read. Perrot, 
Essai sur le Droit Publique 
dAthénes p. 240 n., observes 
that Schoemann in his Anti- 
quities, 1855, had anticipated 
Westermann’s conclusion. In 
his early work Attische Process 
p. 185 he had accepted the 
Oath as genuine. 

mapa tadra] This is best 
taken generally, with Whiston, 
‘in contravention of this,’ i.e. 
of the principles involved in the 
previous declaration: not sup- 
plying ra Wndiouara from p7- 
grotua (Matthiae), nor yet ry 
modrelav as implied in rdv Sjuov 
(G. H. Schaefer, Schoemann, 
Kennedy). 

melcouat] ‘consent’ or ‘ac- 
quiesce,’ from mel@ecOa: cf. Ku- 
rip. Heracl. 104 rérma yap Alka 
rad’ ob melcera, rightly explain- 
ed by Paley. That rdcxew can- 
not =éav, it would be hardly 


necessary to prove if even emi- 
nent scholars had not gone 
astray. A passage in Herod. tv. 
119 was formerly quoted in illus- 
tration of this word: jv pérvro 
érin xal él ryv nuerépny apén Te 
adixéwy, kal jueis ov mewoducda, 
where zewdueba, if genuine, 
must come from racxyw. But 
it is now admitted to be cor- 
rupt: various conjectures are 
given in Bahr’s and Stein’s 
notes, the most probable being 
Bekker’s mepioydueba approved 
by Cobet Var. Lect. p. 284. It 
is odd to find Bahr, after men- 
tioning several of these correc- 
tions, defending meiwdueba by 
reference to the present passage 
of the Timocratea. Wesseling 
and Valckenaer (1763) already 
found it intolerable. It is of 
course the ambiguous form zret- 
coua that is misleading, as well 
as the analogy of ‘patior’ and 
‘suffer ;’ no one would expect to 
find érade for eface, nor has any 
instance of it been produced. 
Xpeev arokoTds...yns dvada- 
ouov] These two ‘notes’ of 
revolutionary times are con- 
stantly coupled together, e. g. 
[Demosth.] Or. xvir. §15. In 
Andoc. de Myst. § 88 we have 
dixa dvddico. ‘appeals’ along 
with xpeayv droxoral. 
ovdé ods gevyovras] The 
clauses ‘not to bring back those 
in exile or under sentence of 


150 


P. 747. ] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


213 


; a \ \ 

KaTéyvMoTat, ovdé Tos pévovTas éEEXD Tapa Tods 
SM € / n , 

vojous Tods Ketmevous Kal Ta Whdicpata Tod Syuov 

n 3 / \ lal a wv > > \ > \ Wy > 

tov A@nvaiwy Kat THs Bovrns ovT avTos éy@ OUT 


\ / / > 
ddnrov ovdéva édow* ovd apynv Katactiow doT 


“apxyew vrevOuvoyv dvta étépas apyns, Kal Tav évvéa 


e \ \ a 
adpyovTov Kal Tov lepouvypovos Kal boat peTa TOV 


, a ieee 4 
évvéa apyovTwv Kvapevovtar Ta’Tn TH nmépa, Kal 


Knpukos Kat mpecBelas cal cuvédpwr' ovdé Sis TH 


death nor expel those who are 
here resident’ appear in the 
words of the speech itself, § 153. 
These were ordinary incidents 
of the struggles between oli- 
garchy and democracy in any 
Greek state, e.g. Megara in the 
time of Theognis or Coreyra in 
the early years of the Pelopon- 
nesian war. 

§ 150. 008 dpyyv Karacriow| 
As long as the compiler con- 
fines himself to generalities, 
‘Nor will I appoint any one to 
an office who has still to render 
his accounts for another office,’ 
he is on safe ground; but we 
get into difficulties with the 
names. The Hieromnemon, or 
principal representative at the 
Amphictyonic council (Dict. 
Antiq. s.v.) is mentioned out of 
his natural order; he would 
more properly be classed with 
the kypuxes and cbvedpor.—xara- 
oTjow is not strictly ‘appoint,’ 
as the officers here mentioned 
were elected by lot (xvayevovrar), 
but their Soxiuacla was tried be- 
fore a jury. 

kvauevovrat] Xen. Mem. 1. 2 
§ 9 of the charges against So- 
crates; Aéywv ws pwpdv ely Tods 
bev THS Toews ApxorTas dd KUd- 
pov Kabtordvat, KuBepynry dé wny- 
déva E0éhew yxpHoOar KvamevTo. 
The verb appears to occur only 


here: the xéayos or lot is to be 
distinguished from the ballot 
(xpvBonv Ynpifser da). 

Tatry TH nueépa] With such a 
writer the question between 
TaUTY, TH Nu. and TF avr7 ju. is 
not historically important. He 
may have thought that all these 
offices were filled up by lot ‘on 
the same day:’ or that the He- 
liast first entered upon his du- 
ties on the day of the election 
of magistrates, and so swore to 
scrutinise faithfully all who 
should be elected ‘ on this day.’ 
The Heliast took the oath once 
for all at the beginning of his 
year of office (above §§ 21, 58). 
The case of Evander on his 
doxyuacta for the archonship 
(§ 138 n.) was heard on the last 
day but one of the outgoing 
year; it is not likely, there- 
fore, that it was tried before 
Heliasts who had just been 
sworn in. 

kal knpuxos Kat mpeoBelas Kai 
couvvédpwv| These words as they 
stand do not seem to be capable 
of any rational explanation. 
To take mpeoBelas=mpecBevrod 
or mpécBewv between two con- 
cretenouns involves great harsh- 
ness; and there would still re- 
main the absurdity of supposing 
that ambassadors were chosen 
by lot among the annual magis- 


151 


214 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 150-152. 


2. & ’ \ mee! : SS A O\ / > \ ba 
avTnv apyiv Tov avTov avdpa, ovdé SVo apyas apEar 


\ a * > fal b] aA 4 rat SX n / 
TOV avTov év TO aVT@ evravT@’ ovdé Sapa Sé£Eopar 
a ¢ / ia vw 3 ee > \ eS > \ 
THS NALATEWS EVEKA OUT AUTOS EYW.OUT adXOS EMOL 


oUT GAAN ElddTOS ewod, oUTE TéxVN OTE pNXaVH 


ovdemid. 


\ / > * / > + 
Kal yéyova ovK éXNaTTOV 7 TpLaKOVT ETN. 


Kal dkpoacopat Tov Te’ KaTNYOpoU Kal TOU a7TrONOYyoU- 
/ ¢ b] a \ n \ b] a 
pévou Opolas audoiv, kai Siayrnpiodpar Tepi avtov 


f re om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum >. 


trates, and before it was known 
what embassies would be want- 
ed. We know that, in fact, they 
were chosen by vote of the Ec- 
clesia as occasion demanded, 
and (the Athenians not being 
devoid of common sense) for 
their personal qualifications. To 
get over this difficulty, Reiske 
proposes to translate the words 
‘heralds (praecones) whether of 
embassies or of synedri:’ mak- 
ing the words refer to two dis- 
tinct classes of xypuxes. This 
sense would be badly expressed, 
and not much more satisfac- 
tory; it is safer to conclude 
that the writer did not know 
his own meaning. 

The xypuxes were of various 
kinds (1) mere ‘criers’ in the 
market, a poor and despised 
class working hard for small 
gains: Demosth. c. Leochar. p. 
1081 § 4 duarede? yap év Ilepace? 
Knpittwv’ TodTo 8 écrw ov pmovov 
aoplas davOpwrivns TeKxunptoy, 
d\rAd Kat doxodlas THs éml 7d 
mpayyareverOa ava-yKn yap nme- 
pevery év TH aryopa Tov ToLovTOr. 
(2) brnpéra or underlings of 
the magistrates, x7jpvé dpxovros 
Corp. Inscript. No. 181, 182; 
knpvé BovrAns rns €& ’Apelov rayou, 
ibid. No. 180, 181; and others. 
(3) Of a higher rank were the 
knpvé THs BovAyjs Kal Tod Snuov, 


and the iepoxyjpvé of the Eleu- 
sinian mysteries. 

ouvéSpwv]  § 127 n. 

or’ ddXos Euol oT’ dAXy] ‘ nor 
shall any other man or woman 
accept a bribe on my account 
with my knowledge.’ K. In 
good Greek this would be tép 
éuod: there is a well-known 
poetical use of the dative after 
déxecOar in the sense ‘at the 
hands of,’ and so=‘ from.’ 

§ 151. tpidkovr érn] The 
Athenian citizen, coming of age 
at 18, served in the home army 
for two years asa 7repi7rodos, and 
enjoyed the franchise in the 
Ecclesia at 20. Ten years more 
were to elapse before he became 
eligible as a dicast. 

kal dxpodooua] The jurors are 
reminded of this clause of the 
oath in the opening words of 
Aeschin. de F. L. and Demosth. 
de Cor. 

Siaynpiduar...) Stwkis A] ‘1 
will decide strictly on the ques- 
tion of the suit:’ on that exact 
question (7epl av’rov) and no 
other. The simple verb wy- 
giotuae is required: ef. Dict. 
Antiq. s.v. ‘ Diapsephisis.’ 

érouviva] This correction of 
Bekker’s avoids the improper 
use of the middle voice (§ 149 
n.), and brings the construction 
into conformity with érapac@ac. 


152 


P. 747.] 


ov av n diwkis 7%. 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


215 


érrouvivat” A/a, TLocesda', An- 


\ > n > / e lal \ bE? a fel 
pntpa, Kal émapdcOa é&ddevav EavT@ Kal oiKig TH 
e a yA / ~f > fa) \ x 
éavTod, el TL TOUT@Y TapaBailvot, evopKodYTL 5é TOANG — 


kayaba* eivas.| 


"Evtad@ ove uu, & avdpes Sixactat, “ovdsé Snow 
«? / 207 499 \ \ / \ / 
A@nvaiwv ovdéva”’ ta ydp Kplvovta tds Kpicess 


¢ , \ é / U > i > / > \ \ 
aTacas Ta OiKaoTHpia éoTLV, ois eEovTla EoTL Kal 


” 
Secpov Kal ado 6 


OKELV. 


A] / - Ud 
Tt ay’ Bovr\wvyTar KaTaylyve- 


¢ \ Ss by4 Ce \ / 
VOC KEW 
Os pev ovv cot vpiv Secpov Katayiy : 
/ 
TavTn™ émideixvups’ ws Se" Ta Sedixacpéva akvpa 


8 7H diwkis Z Bekk. Illud >. 


cum libris. 
Bens. cum >. 


Bens. cum =F vB. 


But it is clear that these in- 
finitives could have formed no 
part of the oath itself: they 
belong to the law which imposed 
it. 

Ata, Toce:da, Anunrpa] ‘Quod 
tradit Pollux paullulum ab hoc 
loco differt: wurvov 3 év’ Apéjnrre 
’Amd\AwW Tarpgov Kal Anunrpa 
kal Ala Baowéa. In Bekk. 
Anecd. p. 443, 31 jusjurandum 
Heliastarum “Hiwov habet loco 
Neptuni.’ H. Schelling de So- 
lonis legibus p. 35 quoted by 
Dindorf. 

moka Kayaba] The reading 
of S, roAAd Kara kal dyabd (see 
various readings) introduces one 
of the phrases to which Ben- 
seler himself objects (§ 149 n.). 
Yet he goes out of his ‘way to 
adopt it, alone among editors. 

Ta yap kplvovra] ‘It is the 
courts that decide all questions 
that are brought to trial.’ 

§§ 152—154. <Any under- 
mining of the powers of the 


i Tlocediava Z Bens. cum =. 
1 G\N’ 6 rt dv Z, dAdo Tu 6 av Bens. cum =. 
m rair’ Z Bekk. Bens. cum libris praeter F. 


h érduvuyac Z Bekk. Bens. 
K kaha xal dyada 


2 ws dé cal Z 


courts will not merely lead to 
a perversion of justice, but be 
highly dangerous politically. If 
what has been decreed by verdict 
may be rescinded by a new law, 
where is the thing to end? Any 
other bulwark of the constitution 
may be subverted by a like pro- 
cess. In the oligarchical revo- 
lutions of former times, the first 
step was to deprive the dicas- 
teries of their power and abolish 
the indictments for illegal mea- 
sures. Circumstances may have 
altered: the constitution may be 
on a firmer footing: but the 
only safe thing to do is to crush 
all such attempts in the bud. 

§ 152. radtry émidelxvupe] See 
the various readings. We may 
say here that ravry is what De- 
mosthenes either wrote or ought 
to have written: but the evi- 
dence is all in favour of the less 
attractive reading rai7r’. Din- 
dorf shows, as usual, ‘the 
courage of his opinions.’ 


216 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 152-154. 


a \ Py \ \ - ME / > \ 8 / / 
Tovey Kab Setvov Kal avoo.ov éote Kal Snpwov KaTa- 
4 
Avols, TavTas av olwal OmoroyHoal. yap TONS 
¢ n L. 4 v \ / \ / 
7UOV, @ avopes StKacTal, vopuow Kab >Whdicpace 
cal \ , 
Siotxetrar. ef On Tis TA WHd@ Kexpyéva VOL KaLW@ 
Avoel, TL Tépas EoTaL; 7) TaS TodTOY SiKxatov éoTL 
/ ] ] b] / “a ? 
vOMOV Tpocayopevelv, GAN OVK avomiav; 7) TAS ov 
nr an / 
THS meylaTns Opyns 0 TOLOVTOS VvomobEeTns aELOs EoTLV; 
eyo ev yap Tov éoyaTov vouifw, ov~x OTL TODTOV 
oI a 
povoy Tov vopov Onkev, GAN tt Kat Tots arrows 748 
6dov delxvvct Kat epi Sixactnplov Katarvoews Kal 
\ A / 4 \ ‘ a BA 
Tept Tav ghevydvtT@v Kabodov Kal mepi TOV adAdov 


153 


TOV SELVOTATODV. 


TL yap KwAVEL, © avdpes SiKacTal, 


ef ovTos Yyalpwv atraddakex 6 TovodTov vopov TLOels, 


Ta Sedixkacuéva dxupa ocety] 
That the setting aside of ju- 
dicial decisions would introduce 
uncertainty into all the rela- 
tions of life was argued in §§ 
72—78. He now approaches 
the question from the political 
side, not without some repe- 
titions of previous arguments. 

vonos Kal Wndicuacr] The 
distinction is explained in Dict. 
Antiq. s.v. ‘Nomothetes.’ ‘The 
mere resolution of the people 
in assembly was a W7ydicpa, and 
only remained in force a year, 
like a decree of the Senate. 
Nothing was a law that did not 
pass the ordeal of the vouobérat,’ 

avoutay|-‘a breach of law’ 
as R. W. and Benseler, rather 
than the abstract ‘ lawlessness.’ 

§ 153. Trav écxdrwy] This 
reading of = is undoubtedly 
right: ra @éoyara is a regular 
phrase for capital punishment, 
e.g. Lys. c. Andoc. § 13 ra 
écxara teloera, c. Agorat. § 60 
Ta éoxara mwadetv. The Attics 
say éoxarn Timwpla, as § 119, 
but peylorn dpyn, not éoxarn. 


ovx 8re To0Tov pdvov] i.e. ov 
povov bre Tobrov, cf, od~x Grrws 
§ 113 n. 

dixacrynpiwy Karadicews] A 
rare phrase for ra ducaornpia (or 
dedixacudva) axupa moe. We 
scarcely find xara\vois in the 
orators except with dyuov: an 
exception, however, is c. Polycl. 
p. 1209 § 11 rpejpous yap duoro- 
yetra: karddvors elvar, the ‘ruin’ 
of it. 

xalpwy dmadddée] For the 
intransitive sense ‘come off, get 
off’ comp. de Cor. p. 246 § 65 
Xelpov nuav dawnd\d\axacw. Ae- 
schin. de F. L. § 38 Anpuocbéyynv 
Tov ovTWwW KaTayed\doTws amah- 
Adgavra, c. Ctes. § 158 odre 
mods yap obr’ léiwrns dvnp ovdels 
mwmrore Kahws amnd\ake Anuo- 
cbéver cvpBovry xpnodevos. 

TiHels] The present participle 
marks the stage which the law 
of Timocrates had reached (not 
being yet out of danger) better 
than @els, and has been rightly 
received: cf. § 131 of rys fevias 
adi Kdpevot. 


154 ovde. 


P. 748.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


217 


n A n U 
érepov davivat ado TL TOY THS TOAEWS LaXUpOTAa- 


\ 2 
T@OV KATANOVTA VOM KaWea; eyo pev yap oipat 


b) , > + \ \ / c/ 
aKkovw Eyw@ye KAL TO TPOTEPOV OVTW KATA- 


AVOjva. Thv Snuokpatiav, Tapavdpwv TpeTov ypa- 


a a “ / > / 
dav KatadvQacov Kal Tov SikacTnpiav aKipav 


t 
YEVOMEVOV. 


mA bd ¢ 7 > 
icws mev ov av TIS VToAaBoL OTL OVY J. 


¢ lj a 
Opolmv OvTMY THY TpayLaTwY voV Kal TOTE éy@ 


\ , a , 
Tepl KaTadvoews TOD Synpov. 


§ 154. dxotw S éywye] The 
orator is doubtless thinking of 
his favourite historian’s account 
of the Revolution of 411, when 
to abolish the ypapy trapavéuwv 
was the first step of the ovy- 
ypagets or oligarchical legisla- 
tors. Thucyd. vir. 67 éojveyxav 
ol Euyypadis adXo per ovder, abrd 
dé rodro, éfetvar wev ’AOnvaluy 
dveireiy yvaunv jv dy tis Bov- 
Anta’ qv Sé tes Tov elwdvTa H 
ypaynrat mapavipwv 7 dAX\w Tw 
Tpbtwwy Bdrayy, pmeyddas fnulas 
éréfecav. Compare Grote’s re- 
marks, ch. 62 (v. 384). 

kal tov duxaornplwr...yevopée- 
vw] kat does not denote a sepa- 
rate step in the process. The 
abolition of the ypagn mapavé- 
wav was in itself the removal 
of the check upon constitutional 
changes exercised by the courts. 

ovx opolwy...viv kal rére] At 
the date of this speech Athens 
had now enjoyed fifty years of 
democratic government (B.c¢. 
403—353) undisturbed by re- 
actionist conspiracies: and her 
constitutional freedom lasted as 
long as her political independ- 
_ ence. Among the causes of 

_ this happy result we shall not 

- be wrong in reckoning the wise 
humanity of the restored demo- 
cracy towards the men of the 
Second Oligarchy, as compared 
not merely with the habitual 


GAN ovdéE orréppa Set 


cruelty of Greek factions but 
with the conduct of the same 
party a few years before. Un- 
like the counter-revolution of 
411, when Antiphon and the 
other leading oligarchs were put 
to death, the archonship of Eu- 
cleides had left behind it no 
bitter memories. But further, 
this softening of manners was 
itself the effect of a common 
calamity: the loss of empire 
had sobered all classes. The 
policy which had exterminated 
Melos (416) and had nearly ex- 
terminated Mytilene (427) had 
been tried and had failed: the 
terrible sufferings of the siege 
and the dark times of the Thirty 
had left behind them a craving 
for repose. The spirit of the 
new time is well expressed in 
the speech of Thrasybulus at 
the end of the second Hellenic 
(11. 4 §§ 40—43): and even the 
unpatriotic Xenophon cannot 
refuse his tribute of admiration 
(kal dudcavres Spkous 7 uyv wh 
pvnoikaknoew, ére kal viv duod 
Te TonTevovrat kal Tots dpxots 
éupéver 6 SHuos), When, after 
ten years (Cnidus 394), Athens 
had recovered from her ex- 
haustion and once more held up 
her head, the lessons of adver- 
sity were not forgotten, though 
all else was: an ‘amnesty’ in 
the best sense of the word. 


218 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 154-157. 


kataBannew év TH TOAEL ovdSéva, 6 avdpes SiKacTal, 
/ , baw] > , x > / >’ \ 
TOLOUTOY TPAayLAaTwV, OVS ef wn Tw av expvoL, GAA 


Kar° 


ddenv Siddvar. 


\ n a a 
TOV €yyxElpodvTa RéyeLy 7) ToLety TL TOLODTOY 


’O / \ / A > / a 
TL TOWUVUV Kat TEXVY) KQAKWS EVEVELPNTE TTOLELV 


¢ a ” f > > a 
vpas, a&.ov Eo TLv aKkovoal. 


¢ a 
Op@v yap éxaoToTe Tav- 


\ \ , \ \ Sa ay \ 
TAS, Kab TOUS T ONLTEVO/LEVOUS Kat TOUS LouwTas, TOUS 


° xal om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum &. 


el wn ww dv éxpia] When dv 
follows «i there is usually a re- 
ference to a further condition, 
either expressed, as in Demosth. 
de F. L. p. 395 § 172=190 
where ei émpécBevo’ av refers to 
el un dia 7d TovTouvs BovAecOau 
cwoa (if I would have gone on 
the embassy but for my wish 
&c.), or implied, as in Plat. 
Prot. 329 B éyw elrep d\Aw TH 
dvOpwrwv teolunv dy (sup- 
posing him to say so) xal gol 
meiOoua. In the present case 
the further condition does not 
mean more than ‘if perhaps,’ 
‘if it should happen so:’ ‘no 
man ought ever to sow the seed 
of such things in the common- 
wealth, even if it should so 
happen that it has not sprung 
up as yet.’ Cf. Jelf, Synt. § 
860. 

§§ 155—159. TI will prove to 
you that he carried this law with 
no honest intent. He took ad- 
vantage of your regard for ‘ law’ 
as such, to bring forward and 
pass that which in reality is no 
law (§ 156). Had he allowed 
you to see this in its true light, 
no magistrate could have put it 
to the vote. But he proposed it, 
relying on the support of the 
other orators. You will see them 
come forward as one man, not 
that they care for Timocrates, 
but because they think it for 


their own interest as a body 
(§ 157). He has talked of it 
himself, avowing his motives in 
the most cynically impudent 
manner ; Androtion, he said, had 
got up at his leisure such argu- 
ments on every point, that no 
harm could come to him (Timo- 
crates) from this impeachment 
(§ 158). I am astonished at the 
impudence of them both: and 
so will you be, when you have 
heard what I am going to tell 
you about the way these two 
men have gone on together. You 
are not likely to have heard it 
before, unless you were present 
at the former trial, when Euc- 
temon prosecuted Androtion. 

§ 155. réxvy] ‘ of malice afore- 
thought,’ opp. to drdds § 157: 
‘by craft’ K.: ‘auf eine raffi- 
nirte Art’ Benseler: but I do 
not think either of these quite 
exact.—xaxas of course goes 
with rovetv.—dévdv éoriv dxodoa, 
‘it is right that you should 
hear,’ ‘ well that you should be 
informed.’ 

Tovs modtrevouévous] The dis- 
tinction between mod:revew and 
mwonirevec Oa. is hardly brought 
out with sufficient clearness in 
L. and 8. mondirevecv = onirys 
elvat, to live under a govern- 
ment: oditeverOar = mrodiTiKds 
elvat, to be a public man, take 
part in the government. 


156 wndev epyao Bat, 


157 


Pp. 749.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 219 


yomous, TOV THs ToAEwsS ayabdv aitiovs vrokapBa- 
yovtas, éoKoTres TOS AhoEL TOVTOUS KaTAaNUCAS, KAY 
dpa AnbOj rodro Trody, pn Sd£er Sevvdv und avardés 
evpev ovv TOUTO O Trem olnke, vo- 
pep TOUS vopous Katanrdoat, iva Tadieypar auTov TO 
Tis cwTnpias dvow exn. of te yap odfovres tiv 
moAw clot vduot, bv Te ovTOS EOnKev ovdév Eexeivois 
TaY avTay éxovTa, VOMOS. THY pev OdVY TOD OVOMATOS 
diravOpwriav, ote TavTnv 8? pariota Tpociedbe, 
kateide’ Thy Se xpelav, OTL Tavavtia éxovoa pavy- 
aeTal, Tapeice. hépe yap mpos Atos, otw batts av 
i) mpoedpos mot éerelendicevy ) TpvTavis TOVT@Y TL 


P dv Z Bekk. Bens. cwm libris. 


éoxéres ms Ajoe] In this 
construction ows is far more 
common: but there is no variety 
of reading.—xdy dpa ‘and if 
after all.’ 

§ 156. wa rddicjnuar’ avrod] 
‘that his misdeeds may have 
the name of salutary measures,’ 
K. very neatly. 

éxovra] attracted to the case 
of ov, though really belonging 
to another clause: this which 
he passed, and which has no- 
thing in common with them, 
is (also) a ‘law.’ 

Thv pev ovv...mapeide] ‘The 
kindly sound of the name “‘law ” 
he clearly saw that you tho- 
roughly like: that in actual 
practice it will be shown to 
have very different qualities, he 
disregarded.’ 

TrauTny dn padtora mpoclecbe] 
The better MSS. read dy...mpooc- 
lecOe: but there is no place 
here for the imperf. ind. with 
dv, ‘you would like it’ if things 
were otherwise: it is a fact that 
you do like it. The reading of 


the inferior MSS. dv...mpoce?- 
ae, followed by Dobree and 
others (including Shilleto on 
F. L. p. 363 § 80, Madvig 
Advers. Crit. 1. 461), is less ob- 
jectionable but still not satis- 
factory. The change of AN into 
AH (Androt. § 70 7.) is so slight 
that it is best to accept Din- 
dorf’s conjecture and take mpoo- 
lecOe asa present. IIpociecPac 
with accus. takes for its sub- 
ject either the thing which 
pleases a person or the person 
who is pleased with a thing: 
ef, Aristoph. Eq. 359 & 3& ov 
mpoclerat pe With Vesp. 742 
tour’ ov divaral pe mpocécbar 
and Eurip. El. 622 rpoonxduny 
7d pnbév. For the sense of xpela, 
‘working’ or ‘ practice’ as opp. 
to theory or previous calculation, 
ef. c. Aristocr. p. 668 § 148 ai 
avaykatat xpetac Tovs TOD Tl mpak- 
Téov h BH Noyiopods dvatpodcw 
diravras. 

§ 157. 7 mpdedpés ror’ érey7- 
gucev 4 mpvravis] The émyn- 
guors Of the rpdedpor or mpuravers 


749 


220) KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 157—159. 


a > n t 4 PE te \ OE a 1h 
TOV EV TO VOLO YEeypampévav; éy@ pev ovdev’ av 
a a 5 af? ¢ £5 z Ul ZO BY 
oat. TOS ovvy TOVO vimédv; vopov EeOeTO dvoma 

al ¢ fal > \ ¢€ »~w 
TOtS AUVTOU KAaKOUpYNMacW. Ov Yap ATMS, OVO OTTwS 

a a a b / 
ETUYOV, ToLovaL KAKOS Upwas, GAN éoKempévas Kal 

a 3 2-.% / - f @ / 3 \ 

TOUT AUTO TPATTOVTES, OVY OVTOL MOVOY, ANNA TrOANOL 
TOV ToONLTEVOMEvwOY, OF TOUT@ TaptovTes avTixa 87) 
Ul > \ led ] maf 
Hara ouvatroroyncovTat, ov wa A’ ov Tipoxparer 

U , 
xapicacbat Bovropevot, 7édev; adr avTa ocupdpé- 
pew ExaoTos nyovpevos Tov vomov. WaTEep ToivUY 

n a f Cal \ 
ovToL odiow avtois BonBotow éd’ vpds, ovTw Sel Kat 

n a lal nn Lad A 
vas viv avtots BonOciv. Kaitos dvepwTovTos TLVOS 

i 7 v4 nan 3 > / / \ 
avTov oTov évexa TotavdT HOéANcE ypadew, Kal O.- 

, ¢ \ \ oy ¢ , , 
eEvovTos Ws yaneTrov TOV ayova vToNauBavor TOV, 
a \ a , > + / 
TeTUpaabass Tov TadTa AéyovT edn’ cvpTrapécea Oar 
yap ’Avdpotiava éavT@, Kal ToLov’Tovs Oyous oxO- 

\ 7 > / \ U vA ? 5 OQ 7/ 
AnV ayovta éoxéhOat Tept TavT@Y woT Ev eidévat 


4 rerugrAGoba Z cum XY. 


was in the assembly, when the 
law first came on as a Wigitna 
(§ 152 n.): for it to become a 
vouos, it must pass a jury of 
vouobérac with a Oecpobérns 
presiding, §§ 27 n., 33 n. 

was ovv Tod wmrédu;] ‘how 
then did he slip through it?’ 
‘ Wie wusste er nun hier durch- 
zuschliipfen?’ Benseler. 

érws érvxov] ‘accidentally:’ 
érvxov with the personal sub- 
ject of pyropes is better than the 
vaguer érvxe. The phrase is 
often a euphemism for what is 
bad: cf. Shilleto on F. L. p. 
428 § 272=309. 

éoxeypévws Kal ovr adrd 
mparrovres] ‘deliberately, and 
making it their business.’ éoxey- 
pévws, of malice aforethought, 
=Téxvyn § 155. 

TOUTW TapLovTEs...cVVaTrOOYT- 
covra| ‘will immediately come 


forward and assist T. in his 
defence:’ atrixa 6) wdda, An- 
drot. § 65 n.: above, § 32. 

mwodev;] ‘why should they ?’ 
parenthetical,— that is not very 
likely’ K. 

§ 158. dreEdvros—rov6e] ‘tell- 
ing him at length what a se- 
rious contest this was that he 
had engaged in.’ 6veécévae im- 
plies some fulness of detail. 

terupwcba] ‘The speaker, 
he said, was mad.’ K. We 
find palvowar cal rerd’pwpat join- 
ed de F. L. p. 409 § 219—241, 
where Shilleto quotes Harpo- 
cration: rerigwuac’ avrl Tov éu- 
BeBporvrnua, éw Trav ppevev yé- 
yova, and the latter refers to de 
Cor. p. 229 § 11 ody otrw rerv- 
PwOuat. 

cxoAj ayovra] Benseler sug- 
gestively translates ‘in seiner 
Studirstube,’ ‘in his study.’ 


P. 750.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 221 - 


a 9O\ + lal / n , \ fal a 
OTL OVOEY aUTE YyevncoLTO dradvpov amd THs ypadis 
THO OE. 

\ / r ? / a \ > a fal Pe > 
THV TOVTOV TE’ KAKELVOU, TOU MEV, EL KANEL, TOU O, EL 


lal ’ / 
159 kal dnta Kat TeOa’paKka THY avaioyvyTiaV 


, 
Tapeor Kal cvVaTTONOYHoETAaL. papTupla yap SnTov 
/ es: li 
havepa yevnoetar Taow viv OTL TOV vomov ToOUTOU 
” age > P) ? oe 78 A \ ee, ¢ \ 
évex érider, GAN ove él Tada Tov avTov. dpmas dé 
Kal tTepl TOV EexElVm TeTTONITEVLEVOV Uuas pmLKPA 
n \ , a 
Bértvov éotiv axodoa, Kal TOUTwY TadTa, OV KEKOL- 
/ - > e\ nr O\ e > / 
vevnkev ovTos Kal dv & TOUTOV ovdeéY HTTOV éxeivou 
x n / > 
Stxalws av pucoite. RéEw 8 ovdev wv axnkoal 
¢ tal > / wv \ a ) / 
Vpeis, Eb pn TWeES apa él Tois EvxTHpove yiryvopévors 
dyoéot Tapnoav. 


75° 


®¥ re om. Z Bens. cum SF v. 


gravpov] In the orators usu- 
ally with \éyeuv or elqeiv, a sense 
illustrated on Androt. §12: but 
sometimes of harm, bad news, 
or misfortune. Mid, p. 579 § 
203 dy dé re pdatipor (dararyyehO7 
TH Todet), Opp. to 7 Tov déovTwr. 
Aristocr. p. 651 § 92 7 ye rédus 
pravpov ovdév meloerar Kata Td 
Phpirua Tobro. 

§ 159. rovrov te xkdaxelvov] 
rovrov, the immediate defend- 
ant Timocrates: éxelvov, An- 
drotion: but below rovrou évexa 
is A.—xaAez is of course future, 
as shown by mdpeo. kcal cuva- 
mohoy}oeTat. 

éml maot Tov adrév] § 18 n. 

kal Tovrwy ravTa] ‘and those 
of them in particular,’ i.e, of 
Androtion’s public acts, ray 
éxely@ TemoXLTevpev wv. 

Trois Huxrnuove yeyvouévors a- 
yoo.] The plural, as two trials 
are referred to: (1) the ypagd7 
Tapavouwy against Euctemon by 
Androtion and his friends (above 
§ 14, ypddovra ro YHpiua) : 
(2) the trial of Androtion, in 


which Euctemon was plaintiff, 
and Diodorus the speaker of 
the Androtionea followed on the 
same side (Androt. init.).—yvyvo- 
pévors imperf. part. 

§§ 160—186. An exposure of 
the whole political career of 
Androtion, as Timocrates’ chief 
friend and partner in guilt: 
mostly repeated from Androt. 
§ 47 to the end, but with occa- 
sional verbal changes to suit the 
altered circumstances of the 
case. In the Timocratea, §§ 
160—168 follow closely Androt. 
§§ 47—56 down to the words 
els 7d Oecuwripiov edKecOa: 
§$ 167—171 are a shorter sub- 
stitution for Androt. §§ 57—64 
beginning with the story of 
Sinope and Phanostrata at the 
end of § 56: Timocr. §§ 172 
—186 are again reproduced, 
with the exception of a few 
sentences, from Androt. §§ 65 
—78. On the question of these 
repetitions as affecting the in- 
tegrity of the speech, see In- 
trod. The differences in the 


160 


16 


La! 


222 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 160-162. 
Kal mparov per, ef’ & wéytotov hpovel, THY THV 
xpnuatov clompakiw é&erdowpev avtod, iv pera 
ToUTov TOU xXpHaTOD TavTas cicémpatey Uuads. ai- 
Tiacamevos yap Kvxtnpova tas vpertépas yew eio- 
dhopas, Kal tobdr éfedéyEev 7 Tap éavtod KaTa- 
Onoew trocxomevos, KaTadvoas Whhicpate KANPw- 
THY apxnv ert TH Tpopacer TavTH él THY eloTrpakw 
mapéov, Kal TodTov mpovBareTo, eimav THY TOV co- 


/ ~ 4 a 
patos appwotiav, iv’, pn, cuvd.olKy jor. 


parallel passages are pointed out 
as they occur: but the explana- 
tory notes are not repeated from 
the former speech. 

§§ 160—169. <Androtion as a 
collector of taxes: his treatment 
of Euctemon, whom he falsely 
accused of retaining balances 
due to you, got you to depose 


him from the office of éxXovevs to - 


which he had been chosen by lot, 
and crept into his place (160). 
He abused the powers that he 
had obtained from you for call- 
ing in arrears of taxes (161): 
so that the example of his con- 
duct did harm out of all propor- 
tion to the gains of the treasury 
(162). Such conduct recalls the 
days of the Thirty, the worst in 
Athenian history (163, 164): or 
rather Androtion surpassed them 
in brutality (165), and treated 
free citizens worse than slaves 
(166, 167). Yet his own father 
had been a defaulter to the state, 
and had escaped from the prison 
to which the son consigned inno- 
cent persons (168). Timocrates, 
his associate in these exactions, 
would not have taken bail from 
his victims for a single day: he 
imprisoned them without trial. 
Yet now he is for bailing out 
men who have been tried and 
sentenced. 


Onunyo- 


§ 160. qv wera rovrov Tod 
xpnorod...vjuds}] Inserted here 
in order to connect Timocrates 
more closely with the acts of 
Androtion. In the parallel pas- 
sage Androt. § 47 we have uh 
TH ToUTouv TposeXovTEs ddafovela 
Tov vodv, adda Td papa, otov 
yéyove TH abet, oKoTobrTes. 

airtacduevos yap Hixrjpova] 
|| Androt. § 48 ovros Hixrjpmova 
onoas. 

kal TovTov mpovBddeTo...cuv- 
dioxy wo] Again bringing into 
relief the complicity of the pre- 
sent defendant: in || Androt. 
the sentence ends with rapéév. 
—mpouBanero is here simply 

‘proposed,’ ‘ put forward,’ as in 

Boeot. de Dot. p. 1021 § 44 by 
ovTos mpovBdrero vairnrnv. With 
the genitive the verb expresses 
the notion of an excuse, shelter, 
or disguise, as in Mid. p. 560 
§ 139 rovrou mpoBéBrnrar Iodd- 
evxros. (But in Mid. p. 579 
§ 200 Medias ’Avayupdovos mpo- 
BEBXnr a it is passive, ‘ becomes 
a candidate.’) Comp. rpé8Anua, 
1 Steph. p. 1122 § 69, with Mr 
Sandys’ note. 

ela THY Tod gwuaTos dppw- 
orlav] ‘on the plea of ill- 
health.’ 

§ 161. Snunyoplay] In || An- 
drot. all MSS. have dnunyoplas, 


p. 751.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 223 


/ Py ee , / ¢ 4 n 7 
plav & émi rovTows Trotovpevos, ws ott TpLa@V aipe- 
n Ul x / 
ous’, ) Ta TouTela KaTaKOTTEW 7) Tad elodépeuy 
/ / . 
i) Tovs odelNovTas. ElaTPATTELVY, AlpovLeVOV ELKOTWS 
> / al 
Upmev Tors odelrovTas elompaTTel, Tals VTOTVeTETL 
\ \ \ a Ld >) 
Katéyov Kal Sia Tov Katpov os hv TéT’ Exwv é£ov- 
a / b] 
clay, Tois pmev KEeLpéevols VOmoLs TrEpl TOUT@Y OUK WETO 
a Lal 199 > \ U 
Seiv ypHaOat ovd, eb pon TovTOUS évopufev ixavovs, 
> rn 
étépous TiWévar, Wndiowata & eimev év vyiv Seva 
’ @ > U lal 
Kal Tapavowa, &: ov npyoNaBer, Tpocaywyet ToUT@ 
, ey ae 
KpP@mevos TOV ANUpaToOV. Kal TOAXA THY VuETépov 
l \ i t D SenSeh \ \ 
Kékrode peTa TovToV’, ypaas Tovs Evdexa Kal Tods 
> / \ \ ¢ / > lal > ¢ lal 
aTrOOeKTAas Kal Tovs UIrnpéTas aKoNovOety uel avToOd. 
> ¢ / 
eit éywy TouvTous Hyev éml Tas vwetépas oiklas, Kal 
\ 3 / a 
av, @ Tiydxpates, cvvnKorovbers, wdvos THY cuUVap- 
/ / bd \ \ ¢ , 
xovTwy Séxa dvTwv. Kal pndels brrodapBavéTo pe 751 


162 


. 


® add. tyiv Bekk. cum libris praeter =ksA}. 
t rovro Z cum =. 


and perhaps it should not have 
been altered here on the sole 
authority of 2. Cobet, indeed, 
thinks otherwise, and reads 6n- 
pnyoptay in both places. But 
more than one speech may well 
have been required to carry all 
the points here mentioned. 
mpocayuwyel TovTw xXpwmevos 
Tv Anuudrwr] ‘making use of 
the defendant as a provider of 
his gains,’ ‘jackal’ L. and §S. 
This clause is notin || Androt.; 
and the rare word mpocaywyevs 
seems post-classical, or at least 
un-Attic (roraywyldes in Sici- 
lian Doric is cited from Arist. 
Pol, vu. § 7). As Mr Whiston 
points out, its use here might 
be alleged in support of Bense- 
ler’s view, that §§ 110—186, in- 
cluding the repetitions from the 
Androtionea, are interpolated. 
The interpolator would natu- 


rally introduce little ‘tags’ (two 
of which have been noticed in 
the last section) in order to 
show the relevancy of his inser- 
tions to the case of Timocrates 
now before the court, 

§ 162. kal wod\d\d Trav wperé- 
pwv] Condensed in || Androt. 
§ 49, where the sentence runs 
dv? Gv hpyoddBer kal moda Tov 
duerépwv KéxAope, Tods éevdexa 
ypawas akoNoubety ped’ éavrod 
elr’ €xwv Tovrous jyev éml tds 
Tov Toro olklas. 

dmodéxras] ‘receivers,’ intro- 
duced by Cleisthenes in the 
place of the ancient cwraxpéras 
or kwraypéra. Below, § 197. 
Aeschin. Ctes. § 25. Dict. Antiq. 
s.v. ‘Apodectae.’ 

kal ov, & Tipdxpares...déxa by- 
twv| Substituted for a passage 
in |} Androt. § 50, cal rov pev 
Evxrjpova...d.a Thy vuerépar. 


224 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 162-167. 


/ ¢ a U + 
Aéyerv WS OU xpHY eiompatTew Tors selrovTas. 
/ ’ \ a ’ ’ a 
XPV yap. AAA TAS; WS O VOpos ayopevel, TOY 
by a \ 
Grwv évexa’ TovTO yap éote SnmoTiKdv. ov yap 
an > >] n , / ea 
TodovTor, @ avopes AOnvaior, wévte TadavTov vir, 
e e , 3 > / / >; / cf 
@Y OUTOL TOT eloémpagtay, TEDEVTMY WpéEANTOE, OoOV 
/ nw 2 
BéPrapbe torovtav eOav eis THY ToNTElay eicayo- 
/ ’ a 
163 wéevov. eb yap €0édoit’’ eEeTacas Tivos Evexa wadrov 
” gr ? Py ‘a oH xv ? Bi / 
av tis EdXovto ev Snuoxpatia Env 7 év oduyapyia, 
i ee U ¢/ / , 
TOUT av EvpoLTE TPOXELPOTATOV, OTL TaVTA TpPAdTEpa 
> x2 / A \ , pn: / 
€oTw* é€v Onmoxpatia. OTt wey Tolvuy THs OTov Bov- 
? ' a 3 / \ Lf 
Neo Oe cduyapxias TOAA@P aceryéotepa Kal deworepa 
5) / ®@ / 3 \ Sete fg , 
ETOLOUY OUVTOL, Tapareliiyw' ada Tap nHpiv ToOTE 
4 / > a / / 7 49 ¢/ 
mMoOmToTE SewvoTaTa év TH TWOAEL yéyovev; Ev O10 OTL 
tal U 
164 é7l Tov TpLaxov? AmavTes av elToTe. TdTE TOIVU)D, 
@s Eat aKoveL, Ovdels EoTLV boTLS aTreaTEpEtTO TOD 
a A e \ / / b) > eA,” 
cwOjvat, doTis EéavToy olko. KpUrreley, GAN avTO 
TOUTO KaTHYIpOvGL THY TpLaKOVTA, OTL TOVS EK THS 
a b] n + , 
aryopas adixws amnyov. ovToL Tolvuy Toc¢avTHY UTEp- 
/ an ¢ fal iA 
Bonny éroincavto éxelvav THs avTav Tovnpias Bor 


v é0é\er’ Z Bekk. Bens. Oéder &. 
x éorw om Z. Bekk. cum X. Tidem év r7 Syp. 


dyopever] Kedever || Androt, 
without variation, and some 
inferior MSS. here. The latter 
have doubtless been altered into 
conformity with the parallel 
passage; but I do not think this 
argument applies to dyunyopias 
in the last section. 

WévTE TANGYTWDP...... TelévTov | 
|| Androt. § 51 roco’rwy xpnyud- 
Twy TovTov Tov Tpbmov elompax- 
Oévrwv, and éfnulwobe for Bé- 
Prapbe. In Androt. § 44 the 
arrears thus collected are put at 
seven talents. 

§ 163. ef yap é0é\o17’] Both 
here and in || Androt. 2 reads 


Oéder’ é&erdcat. Dindorf in his 
last edition reverts to the com- 
mon reading in both passages. 

TONG aced-yéoTEpa ... ovTOL] 
Adapted to fit both men from 
ovTos acedyéoTepos yéyove || An- 
drot. where see note on dge)- 
vs. ; 
ev of O71] om. || Androt.— 
Tpiaxov®’ aravres] TpidxovTa, Tav- 
res from || Androt. is less well 
supported, but sounds better at 
least to my ear. 

§ 164, GAN’ avrd roiro Karn- 
yopodc:] || Androt. § 52 adda 
TOUTO KaTYyopoUper, 

ovrol...é€rornoavto] || Androt. 


165 


166 


P. 752.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 225 


2y f AuTevdmevot Tv idlav olKiav ExacTwW 
év OnfLoKpaTia TodLTEvoM nv é ¢ 
\ > \ \ 
SecpwrTnptov Kabictacay, Tos evdoex adyovtTes él Tas 
lal / i | eae 
oiklas. Katto, & avdpes AOnvaior’, Ti oiler Oe, OTroT 
Di ’ Ss 
avOpwrros Tévns, ) Kat TAOVGLOS, TOAAG 8 aynro- 
’ ,’ ,’ 
KOS Kal TW lows TPOTTOY ELKOTWS OUK EUTOPaY apryu- 
\ 3 \ n 9 fol 
plov, 4) frovoy eis THY ayopav goBotr éuBanreiv, 
be] \ ¢ lal € \ / 
GAA pO olKot pévery aghares nyoiTo, 6 dé TovTwY 
54 > / v \ ,~D ¢ \ ¢ nr / 3A 
aittos “Avdpotiwv ein, Ov ovd vrép avtod Sixnv a 
a \ \ / / / ? 2 \ 
AaPeiy Ta wempayneva Kat BeBiopéva, un TL y v7TEp 
n / / / 
THS WOAewS elompaTTew eiohopas; KaliToL el TIS 
/, , 
Eparr’ autov » oé, ® Timoxpates, Tov émawwérnv Tov- 
\ \ b] \ / A ld 
TV Kal cuvepyov, Tas ELahopas TOTEpoY Ta KTNMATA 
x \ / > ls \ / / ra, v 
) Ta chuata odelrNel, TA KTHAaTA dHyoalT av, elTrEp 
7 \ / > J / 
adnOn réyev BovrAoLtcOe* aro yap TovTwY eiahépo- 
, > , , , 
fev. Tivos ovv vex, ® KaKioTOL TavTwY avOpwrar, 
\ 
abévtes TO TA ywpla Snuevew Kal Tas oiKias, Kal 
nm > b] / b) a \ ¢ / , ’ 
TavT amroypadel, dette Kal vBpilere TodiTas av- 
/ cP, 
Opadtrous Kal Tos TadaiTrodpous peTolKous, ols vBpt- 


a a / n ¢ / 2 ut 
TTLKWTEPOV VueEls 1) Tols oiKéTALs TOTS UMETEpOLS av- 


Tov éypnabe; Kal puny ei €0édotTe” oKéefacOat Tap 


Y Stxacral Z Bekk. Illud DAQkr et || Androt. 
* ’@édere Z Bekk. Bens. OédeTe D. 


in the singular odros...érounoaro 
and so r7s avTob BdeXuplas for 
THs avTev mwovnplas...modtTevowe- 
vos...KabiaTn...Tovs evden’ dywr. 

§ 165. pH pdvor...dcgpares 
jyotro| || Androt. § 53 more at 
length: 4 réyos ws rods yelrovas 


elomparrew elapopas] Omitted 
in || Androt. 

§ 166. 4 oé, & Tipoxpares... 
suvepyov] Omitted in || Androt. 
§ 54. 

onoar’ av...BovroGe] || An- 
drot. djceev dv...BovdorTO. 


VrepBalvor 4 UmTodva0 vro KAly ny 
Urép Tob un TO cap’ ddods els TA 
decuwrnprov ErxerOar, 7 GAN a- 
oxnnovoin, & dovrAwv, ovK édevde- 
pwv éativ epya, kal Trav’ ve THs 
yuvatkos 6p@ro troy, iv ws éev- 
Oepos Hyyuvnoaro Kal THs modews 
woNrys. 


W. D. 


édeire kal UBpleere] Again the 
plural in order to include Timo- 
crates. || Androt. @es cal iBp.- 
ges: and so ols vBpiorixwrepor 74) 
Tots oikéTats Tols GavTOU KEXpNCAL. 

§ 167. ei é0é\o:re]_ So Din- 
dorf here and in || Androt. § 55 
for @é\ere, in this instance 


15 


75 


9 


— 


168 


169 


226 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 168-171. 
Upiv avtois, @ avdpes Sixacral, Ti SovrAov 7) ENeVOepov 
eivat Svadhépet, TOUTO péyLoToV av evpoite, OTL Tots 
pev SovrAolsg TO TOMA TOV adiKnuaToV aTdaYToV 
¢ id , > nr > / ¢/ a 
vtevOuvov éatt, Tois 8 édevOépois Votatov TodTo 
, U e \ > / > \ y b] 
mpoonket KoNate. ob O€ ToOVVaYTIoV ets TA COpmal’, 
dotep avopamrooos, €TolnoavTo Tas Tiwpias. ovTw 
& avicows Kat TWAEOVEKTLKOS gaye mpos vas ’Avdpo- 
tlwv dete Tov ev adTOD TaTépa weTo' Seiv, Snuocia 
deOévta éml ypnuacw év TO Seopwrnpiy, pT aTo- 
, Qn n a > 
dovta tadta pnte xpiOévt atrodpadva, tTév 8 adwv 
TOALTOY TOV pn SuVapevov TA éavTOD Oeivat olKoDev 
>] \ / > Yd id + i. 4 lal / x 
eis TO Seapwtnpiov aybévta up éavTod dedécbat, Kat 
Tipoxpatns Tov péev TOAA@Y HuaVY TOTE, OTE THY 
dutdaciay eicémpattev, ovd av tap évos aBeiv 
nOEAnoEV eyyuNTas, un Méexpl THs éevaTns TpuTavelas, 
GNX ovdemsds* nuépas, GAN’ 7 SuTrAG Ta ypnpar ev 


® d\\G mids Z Bens. aAd’ ode wrds Bekk. 


against the weight of evidence. || Androt. €\xeo@ar. Here for 

Cf. § 163. the present the repetition comes 
map vpiv...diaoral] Omitted to an end. 

in I Androt. § 169. rév pev Today Huay 


Voraroy TovTo mpoonKel Koha 
ge] || Androt. Kay Ta peor’ 
aruxaor, Touré y’ évestt caoa’ 
els xpnuata yap Thy Siknv mepl 
Tov wheloTwv Tapa TOUTWY mpoc- 
nKxet NauBaveww. Cobet acutely 
remarks that the orator felt he 
had gone too far, since capital 
punishment of free citizens was 
common enough; and accord- 
ingly, i in repeating himself, puts 
in voraroy as @ saving clause 
(Mise, Crit. p. 532). 

oi. dé...€moinoavto] In || of 
Androtion only, 0 6é...émovetro. 

§.168. dvicws] alicxpis || An- 
drot. § 56.. ’Avéporiwy omitted 
as there unnecessary. 

axGévra vd’ éavrov dedéo0a] 


...map évos| ‘from one of no 
common folk.’ Invidiously con- 
trasted with the professional 
politicians (/ynTopes), who would 
stand by one another. 

ore THY Surdaclay eicémparrer] 
‘in the cases when he levied the 
double amount:’ the imperf. 
marks a repeated action. 6- 
wraclav, § 111 n. 

un péxpt] pn om, as G. H. 
Schaefer observes, would be 
more usual, but the meaning is 
the same: ‘ne forte putes.’ 

GAN ovdemtas] It certainly 
seems better to write divisim, 
with Bekker and the old edi- 
tors, add’ ovdé pds. To omit 
ovdé, with 2, Benseler and Z, 


170 


P. 753.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 227 


a / 
KaTtaBadrew 7 Tapaxypnua SedécOar. trapedisov 8 
a 3 U lal 
oUTOS Tols EvdeKa TOV OVK WPANKOTA ev TH SiKATTH- 
plo. viv & oTws ov av vueis KaTayVaTE AdeTOoL TeE- 
¢ \ , al 
pliaciv, UmevOuvoy avToY Trolncas Vopov EiceveyKeEtV 
E€TOAMNGED. 
? b] a 
"AAN Suws Kaxeiva Kal tade dynoovow vTép 
¢ Lal , r af ¢ a > , ¢ \ 
Upav mpattew. eita TAaVO vpels avade~ecOe vTép 
tal an \ lal ‘ 
bmeav mempaxat, Kal Ta THS TOUT@Y OpacuTHToS Kal 
/ ” / 4 > \ a >] }- 
Tovnplas Epya TMpaws olaeTe; AAAG putcelv odeireTE 
TOVS ToLovTOUS, @ avdpes “AOnvaiot, uadrXov 7 ooH€euv. 
\ a / 
TOV yap Umép THS TOAEWS TPAaTTOVYTA TL Kal TpawY 
a \ A a 
pov tevEdpevovy TO THS Todews HOS ExyovTa Sei 
U rn > al an 
dhaiverbar. todto & éatl ti; Todvs acbeveis éreciv, 
a n / 
Tois iayupois Kal Suvapévors pr) erritpérrewy VBpivev, 
\ ] al 
ov Tovs mév ToANOUS WLos peTayerpifecPal, KoNa- 
, \ \ ] / n “\ \ a 
Keveww dé Tov ael Te SUVacOat SoxodvTa. 0 ov TroLE;s, 
5 , . > \ a lal x ¢ eat \ 
@ Tuoxpates’ d¢ & TOAA@ paAXdov av eiKdTwS fU1) 


sounds very poor, Jdedéc0a, 


§ 60 n. 

Tov ovK WdAnKOTAa] Opp. to dy 

av wets Karayvare. 
O7ws...... mepiacw] Several 
MSS., though not the best, read 
mepiiwow. As Cobet notes, Nov. 
Lect. p. 515, the copyists were 
prone to alter the future after 
orws into the subjunctive: or 
they may not have known that 
mepuaow is future. 

UrevOuvoy av’Tov tonoas] ‘he 
has dared to introduce a law 
and to make himself respon- 
sible for it.’ 

§$ 170, 171. Timocrates, and 
those whose cause he has taken 
up, will say that they are acting 
for your good. But such a plea, 
and the appeal for mercy ground- 
ed upon it, ought only to be lis- 
tened to in the case of men who 


show that they have in them the 
spirit of the Athenian constitu- 
tion. That spirit is to pity the 
weak, to repress the strong and 
powerful; the exact opposite of 
theirs. 

§170. Kdxetva xal rade] ‘both 
on this and the former occa- 
sion ;? aS oppressive exactors, 
and now in reference to this law, 

dvadétecOe...rempaxOa] ‘ will 
you then admit that such things 
have been done?? K. ardga 
‘nay on the contrary.’ On ow- 
few opp. to pucetvy, Androt. 
§ 64 n. 

mpduv vuwv Tevéduevorv] ‘who 

would experience your clemen- 
cy.’ . 
§ 171. Tov dei re Sivacban 
Soxotvra] ‘those who appear 
from time to time to possess in- 
fluence.’ K, 


15—2 


753 


172 


228 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 172-174. 


na a 3 / > 
eOeAnoavtes” axodoat cod Oavatov Kataynhicaw# 
ovtot 7) Os “Avdpotiov’ adeinoar®. 
e/ / IQA \ yy ? \ ¢ ‘ € a 
Ore toivuy ovdé tTHv elompakiw avTnv VTép Vuov 
f L tovr avtixa 5) para vuiv dyr 
mevoinvtat, Kal TovT avTixa 67) para vpiv dSnrov 
3 \ , a 
Toimow. €b yap Tis porto avTovs TOTEpoL avTots 
a a n A , e i 
Soxovat adixety addov THY TOALY, OL yEewpyovuvTES 
, \ an ’ 
Kal hedopevot, Sia Traootpopias Sé Kal otKeia ava- 
A@pata Kal AevToOupylas ETEpas EAAENOLTFOTES Elogo- 
lal a , 
pav4, 7) of Ta THY eOeAnTAVTMY EicEVEyKElY YpNnUATA 
n > 
Kal Ta Tapa TOV TUppaywV KrAéTTOVTES Kal aTrOA- 


> 'OeXnoavres Z Bens. © gdlecavy Z Bekk. Bens. v. not. 
4 elcpopas Z Bekk. Bens. cum =. 


Oavarov xarayndicawé’] Cf. . 
§ 95 extr. orioty dv rafos ; §119 
extr, Tis éoxarns Tiwplas Tv- 
xe. 

adelnoay] There is no tho- 
roughly satisfactory reading 
here. Good Attie requires the 
optative, and ddezev as the form 
of it: Dindorf follows one M8. 
‘correctus v.,’ all other MSS. 
and edd. agreeing in ddiecav; 
and Shilleto approves (on F. L. 
p. 363 § 71=80). Ido not see 
how the imperfect is to be justi- 
fied here, even if we were to 
omit da and translate ‘ acquit- 
ted Androtion’ on the former 
trial. Cf. § 8m. It is worth 
noting that according to the 
late (and modern) Greek pro- 
nunciation, apdlecay and adely- 
cay are undistinguishable, hav- 
ing the same’accent. 

§§ 172—175. Their pretence 
of public spirit is easily exposed; 
for while levying arrears of taxes 
on men for whose shortcomings 
there was often the excuse of in- 
ability, they have done nothing 
in their political careers for the 
repression of much more serious 
offences. The public treasury 


has been robbed of much larger 
sums, the contributions of our 
allies and of those who pay their 
taxes readily. Many generals 
and orators have been brought to 
justice for these peculations: 
neither of you two has ever ap- 
peared as the accuser of any of 
these, never expressed indigna- 
tion at the way the state was 
being fleeced (173). The fact is 
(turning to the jury) that An- 
drotion and men like him are 
accomplices with such offenders 
and share largely in their illicit 
gains (174). You ought to pun- 
ish such men when you catch 
them, whether the time that has 
since elapsed be long or short. 
If you show leniency now, you 
will be thought to have acted 
from passion and not from jus- 
tice, when you compelled them 
to disgorge the money (175). 

§ 172. This section follows 
Androt. § 65 verbatim with only 
the necessary changes from the 
singular to the plural: zezolny- 
tat for merolnra, avrovs morepov 
avrois for a’rév mwérepoy aire, 
bvres dvatdets ENOorev for dy dvat-' 
djs ENOor, 


P. 754] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 229 


, b] x > AT / / / v 
AvvTES, OUK AV Eis TODTO SHOU TOAMNS, KalTrEp OVTES 
. tad + vA lal \ \ e a \ 
avatoels, EXOovev Wate hjcat Tos Ta EavT@V [1 
> / na > tad xX \ \ % -¢€ 
ela hépovtas madXov aoiKely 7) TOUS TA KoLVA Upatpov- 
, 
173 /LEVOUS. 
uP > Led v / x / > , bd 
TLOV, ETO OVTOV TAELOVWY 1 TPLaKoVTa ad ov 


> 
tivos ovv vex’, & Tipdxpares cal ‘Avdpo- 
vA 
0 YE 754 
x4 ¢ a / ‘ 3 / lal / 
Erepos UMOV TOALTEVETAL, Kal EV TOUT® TO YpOVO 
A \ n 3 , \. / 
TOANWY LEV TTPATHNY@V NOLKNKOT@V TV TOALY, TOA- 
2 \ , 
rev S€ pynTopwv, ob mapa TovTotol KéKpLVTat, Ov ot 
\ n > | ] e b] , e >] ¢ / 
pev teOvadow éf ois Hdixovy, of O vrroywpnoavtes 
a“ >] \ / 
@YOVTO KaTAYVEVTES AVTOV, OVdEVOS TTOTE TOVTMY 
, ¢ r ] / 399 lal 
éEntacOn KaTnyopos Uuav ovdétepos, ovd ayavaKTav 
ap0n Urép wy 1 TOMS TaTKOL®, AN evtTadP epavnP” 
174 nov eniouevor, 00 TroANOvs ede KAKBS. arovieat ; Bov- 
NeoOe, & avbdpes "AOnvaios, 76 TodTwv altioy éyod bpiv 
r ? n ¢e 
elm@ 3 OTL TOUT@V peV pEeTéEYOVOLY BV. adLKOVaLY Upas 
Twes, amd Oé THY elompatTopévwv vUpatpovvTat’ Ov 
. , \ , , a \ t : 
amAnotiav Sé tTpdTrav SuyoBev KapTrobyTat THY TOLD. 
” \ en a \f ne a > 
ovTe yap paov moAXols Kal* wiKpa adiKodow aTre- 
, Rin? / \ / v , 
VOaver Gat H OdUiyoLs Kal peyada, ovTE SNMmoTLK@TEpov 
/ \ a a 9 / DC. DN \ a 
onmov Ta TOV TOANY abdixnual Opadv 7 Ta ToV 


© racxet Z Bens. cum ZFuB. - * add xara Z Bekk. Bens. 


§ 173. Theinvective of An- vyovo.: then éfnrdcOns...... wo- 


drot. § 66 is ingeniously made 
to fit two persons, 

o Timoxpares kal *Avdporiwr] 
|| Androt. @ BdeXupé. 

& ye érepos vudv monireverat] 
|| Androt. od modtrever. Hence 
it may be inferred that Timo- 
crates was much younger than 
Androtion; or if the passage be 
not genuine, the writer wished 
to avoid committing himself to 
any statement about T.’s age 
at this time, of which he knew 
nothing. For vmroxwpyocavtes 
@xXovTO KarayvovTes. avrwy ||. An- 
drot. has droxwpncayres ev- 


Ons... 
an’ evra? épavnd’] || An- 
drot. olrws dv Opacis Kal Aéyew 
dewos, GAN’ évTand’ épavns Knde- 
pay av ov ge ToAXovs See KaKWs 
Toned. 

§174. Verbatim from Androt. 
§ 67 with the usual changes: jeré- 


xovow ... Upapodvrat ... KapTrovy- 
ra for peréxet...vparpetrac...Kap- 
mwovrat, According to Benseler, 


however, the text of || Androt. 
has been altered into greater 
conformity with the present 
passage than it originally ex- 
hibited: see the note there. 


230 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 175-177. 


¢ \ / a / 
175 OAtywv. adda Toor altiov ovyad Aéyo. Set Toivuy 
rn , \ / ia x 
buas Tadta Noyifopévous®, Kal pmewvnwevouvs wv av 
7 / / \ 
exacTos aapTn, Kkonralew, oTav AaBNTE TLVAa, Kal ) 
\ / > , > > + 2S 3 / n 5] DI 
TOV “povor, EL ToAUS €oT at €eKElVOU, TKOTELV, AAX 
> nw 3 > / ec > lal Md ” 5 > > Li, 
ei TaDT érrolovy. ws ei vdv Tpaws olceT €’ ols TOT 
a a + i , / \ / 
nyavaxteite, So€eT opytlomevor KaTEyV@KEVaL TA YpPN)- 
a \ >’ 
LATA TOUTWY, OVK GOLKoUpeEvol. TOV pEev yap opyLto- 
, > \ es \ L6H fF eZ / 
PEVOV EOTLY o&éws TL KAKOV TOV AEAUTTHKOT Epya- 
a , 9 , od > ¢ 9? CAH 
cacbat, Tov dé adikovpévwv, btav Tod vd avTois 


AdBoot Tov HSiKnKdTAa, TOTE TYLwpHoacbaL. ovKOUY 


& Noywouévous Z Bekk. Bens. cum =. 
h Um’ avrois Z Bekk. Bens. 


$175. A weaker substitution 
for § 68 of the Androtion, with 
its touches of vigorous humour. 
The platitudes of this section, 
and the obscurity of its allu- 
sions—for the difficulty of deci- 
ding what transaction is alluded 
to in xateyvwxévae TA XpHuaTa 
rovTwy is in strong contrast with 
the generally clear presentment 
of facts in both speeches—un- 
questionably seem to point to 
Benseler’s conclusion that this 
part of the speech has been in- 
terpolated. 

ef trait’ érolovy] ‘whether 
they were guilty of these things,’ 
érrolovy is used, not érolncar, as 
a series of acts is intended. 

ws el viv...ép’ ois rér’] To 
what does rote refer? Reiske 
thought, to the former action 
of Euctemon (and Diodorus) 
against Androtion. But there 
is reason to think he was ac- 
quitted on that trial (above § 8): 
and even if it were not so, I 
fully agree with Mr Whiston 
that the argument is not logical 
or relevant: that Timocrates’ 
offence in proposing the law is 
‘not the same as, nor even in 


pari materia with, the acts 
which had previously caused 
the indignation in question.’ 
See the next note. 

doer’ dpyifomevor...ovK ddiKov- 
pevot] ‘it will be thought that 
you condemned these men in 
those sums of money because 
you were angry, not because 
you were injured.’ xareyvwxé- 
va. Ta xphuata TovTrwy clearly 
refers to the same event as Tore: 
and this is, I think, the decree 
of Euctemon mentioned in § 13, 
the effect of which had been 
that Androtion, Melampus and 
Glauketes, after having ex- 
hausted every subterfuge, were 
ultimately compelled to refund 
the prize-money taken on board 
the trireme (xpyuara Navxpari- 
Tika, § 11). Even so, the argu- 
ment does not seem worthy of 
Demosthenes: but, on the other 
hand, we have seen abundant 
proofs that he was not particu- 
lar as to the logical exactness 
of any argument which was 
likely to weigh with a jury who 
heard it only once: and he may 
have used it. 


P. 759. KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 231 


de? Soxetv viv padraxicbévtas TOTE TOY OMapLodLévav 
SpKov auednoavtas viv avtois yapicacbat Tapa TO 
Sixatov, GAXd puceiv Kal pnd avéyxerOat havi unte 755 
TOUTOU MNT eKElVOU, TOLAVTA TETTONLTEUPLEVOV. 

"Adra v7) Ala tadta pwovoyv ToLodToL yeyovacw €év 
ois wemonitevytat, GAra & Ecol & Karas SipKynKacw* 
GANA Kal TaAXa OVTO TpodEeAnAVOacL TpdS Vas 
@o8 Hheuota év ols axnkoate akvov éote picely av~ 
Tovs. TL yap BovreoOe cirw; Ta TopTeEla ws éreE- 
oKevakacl, Kal THY TAY oTEehavwy KaBaiperwW, 7} THY 
Tov piarov Tolnow THY KaAnV; GAN él TovToLs Y’, 
et pndev GAXO HOikovy THY TOAW, Tpls, OVX Gamat 
TeOvavat Sikaiws av pot Soxodet’ Kal yap iepoounia 
Kal doeBeia kal KAoTH Kal Tac1 Tots SeworaTols Eiaiy 
évoxot. Ta uev ov TOAN Oy Aéyov epevaxifev Vas 
’Avdpotiov trapareiw* pyoas S aroppeiv ta PUG 


176 


177 


vov padraxicbévras] ‘by your 
present leniency.’ —duwpocpé- 
vev, Androt. § 4 n. 

duly avrots xaplcac@a] Not 
as K, ‘gave way to your feel- 
ings,’ implying pity: but as 
R. W. ‘ gratified your passions,’ 
i.e. your avarice. The tempta- 
tion to which they would be 
thought to have yielded was 
that of voting invariably in 
favour of treasury claims, right 
or wrong (Androt. § 48 n.). 
Hyperides pays an adroit, but 
I fear undeserved compliment 
to an Athenian jury, when he 
pronounces it impossible that 
they should entertain any other 
thought than that of the guilt 
or innocence of the accused. 
Polyeuctus, the prosecutor of 
Euxenippus, had _ repeatedly 
made invidious allusions to the 
wealth of the defendant, with 


insinuations that it was ill- 
gotten: in ignorance, observes 
the counsel for the defence, of 
the fact that otre djuds éorw 
ov5é els ev TH olxoupévyn obre 
pbvapxos otre eOvos pmeyando- 
Wuxorepov Tod Snuov Tod ’AAn- 
valwy, Tods bé cuKopayvToupmévous 
Tov todkitav 7 Kad’ éva 7 GOpoos 
ov mpoterae GAG Bonet (pro 
Eux. col, 42, 43). 

§§ 176—186. In these sec- 
tions the verbal correspondence 
is almost exact: the few altera- 
tions are noted. 

§ 176. || Androt. § 69 ratra 
pev Towvrds éoriv, év ols memo- 
Alrevrac... SupKyKev ... TporeApAv- 
Ge...€meckevace. 

§§ 177, 178. || Androt. §§ 69, 
70 ef wat pndey dddr\o déikwv 
éruxe...dixacos wy pavetrar...éarly 
évoxos...epevaxigvev wuds °Avdpo- 
tlw. 


232 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 178-183. 


An , \ \ 5 \ \ t 
TOV oTrehavov Kab GATTPOVS elval dua TOV \Ypovor, 


179 


180 


ef ” A ef vv > >? > / 
w@oTep lwy 7 podwy ovTas, aXN OU XpUaioU, TUYKw- 
7” fal r 
vevery ereioev. aipebeis & éml tatTa mpoceideTo 
TOUTOY TOV TAVT@V TOV KAKOV KoLWWMVOY. KAaT éTrl 
lal lal \ a 
pev tals eiodhopais Tov Snuccuov Tapelvar Tpocéypa- 
¢ / x 
arev ws 8) Sixatos @v, OY ExaoTOS avTiypadeds 
ba ” a > , ‘ > a 
éuerrev écecOar THY eiceveyKovT@v’ éml ToIs oOTE- 
¢ , tate 
davois 8, ods KatéxoTrTev, ovxl Tpoonyaye TavTO 
a ’ ’ ’ 7 
Sixatov TOUTO, GAN avTOS PNTWP, KpUTOXOOS, Tapias, 
> / \ \ > \ e/ 3 be / 
dvtiypadeds yéeyovev. Kal py eb pev arravt n£&iovs, 


/ : a , 
boa TpaTTels TH TOE, TAVT@ TLoeTEVELV, OVK AV. 


¢ , , * b] aA. n eo % an ’ lal 
Opmolws KNETTNS av ehbape’ viv O ert Tats elahopais 
\ / U ? > ¢ / \ \ , >? * Cal 
0 dikaiov éo@ dpicas, wn col TioTevelv, adda TOS 
Cc oa / \ U ¢ | a eer LU \ 
auThns SovAoLs THY TOW, OTOT ANAO TL TPATTWY Kat 
> a ¢ / 
xpnpata Kway iepa, dv évia ovd éml THS NmeTEepas 
‘ 7 ; ee 
yeveds avetéOn, un Tpooyparapevos THY auTnY pu- 
/ a al a 
Aakhv hviep él Tv eiohopav haiver, ove 75n SHAov 
a a “2 
82 0 todr éroincas; éyd péev oimat. Kal pn, @ 
bla 5 "AGO / \ \ \ i Qn / , 
avdpes AOnvaiot, kal Kata wavTos' TOU xpovov oKéE- 
€ \ \ RE / n / 
vpacbe ws Kaa Kal CnrwTa éTriypappata TNS TOEWS 
3 \ € > n \ > / 3 
averov ws aceBh Kal Sewa avteméypawev. oipat 
\ ¢e cal x ¢ a a 
yap vmas aravtas opav UT Tav oTepavwy Talis Yol- 
/ a 
vikiot KaTw@OED yeypappéva “ot cvppayos Tov djpov* 
Cee 5 A/ ia > > / i \ 5 / ” 
avdpayabias &ver’ éotehavwcay' Kai diKatoovyns 


rX 6 ¢ , > a a3 if AEP 4 52) 3 
) “ol cvppaxor apioteiov TH AOnvaia avébecav” 1 


i xa?’ dmavros Z Bekk. Bens. cum 2. 
k add rv’ A@nvaiwy Z Bekk. Illud 2. 1 [éorepavwoav] Bekk. 


alpebels § éml ravra—kowwvor] 
Omitted in || Androt., but needed 
here to connect T. with A.’s 
misdeeds. 

§ 179. |} Androt. § 71 rots 
éaurns Sovdos...ovK evdnrov Ov a. 


§ 180. || Androt. § 72 -dvre- 


miyéypagev ... dvdpayablas évexa 
kal dexacocvvns...7n "AOnvala om. 
avéecay...Tdv Shuov om. éorepa- 
vwoav...[émeyéyparré tov]...0m. 
XaBplas ard ths &v Nag vav- 


Maxtas. 


756 


181 


182 


P. 756, 757.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 233 


an A , 
Kata Tones “ot Seives™ Tov Siuov éotehavwcav 
“awbévtes td tod Snuov,” olov “ KvBoets EhevOepa- 
“ iA) / b U \ 8 a 93/3 , PA 
évtes éotehavwcay Tov Shuwov” éreyéypaTTo Tov, 


, cc / Se IN n / a \ 
maw “Kovwv aro THs vavpayias THs mpos Aaxe- 
‘“ Satpovious,’ “XaBpias amo ths év Nd&@ vavpa- 


” n \ a 
xlas. ToLtadtTa yap HY Ta TOV oTEpavev émvypap- 
fa) \ \ fal 
pata. TavTa pév Toivurv, & mpoTtepov Enrov Troddy 
9 ‘ / ¢ rn ’ / ‘ 
elye Kat pirotipiav vyiv, npavictar KabaipeOevTwv 
a t PISA \ a ' \ Soc. Se, ee 
Tov otedavev’ éml dé Tais diddais, as avT éxei- 
ore ¢ e 
vov éroimoato vuly 6 Topvos ovTos, “’Avdpotio- 
/ \ 
“ vos émipedovupevov erroinOnoav™” émuyéypaTTat, Kat 
i a ‘ 
ov TO GCOp"a HNTaLpnKOTOs ovUK edow of vomoL Els 
/ a a : 
Ta lepa eiolévat, ToUTOV Tovvoma év Tois tepots eri 
“~ a / U7 
ToOV piarev yeypappmévoy éotiv. Opoldy rye, oU yap; 


‘TOUTO Tois TpoTépows Etriypappacw, 7) didroTiulav 


yy 54 Caw , / > t oO \ 8 / > 
lonv éyov vuiv. tpia Tolvuy é« TovToV® Ta SewwoTaT 
f / a 
av Tis lot Tempaypyév’ avTois. tHv pev yap OBeov 
\ t / : a / \p \ 
Tovs otedhavouvs cecvAnKact’ THS ToAEwS SE? TOY 
Ejrov nbavixace Tov €k THY Epywv, OY UTOMVNnLA 
3 ” ¢ s A \ gee: , , > 
noav ovTes ol oTépavot’ Tovs 8 avabévtas SoEav ov 
\ ’ , \ é n ® x Ss 10. 20é 
pixpav adypnvtTat, TO doxeiv wv av ev TaPwow €OE- 
ew peuvijobar. Kal ToadtTa Kab TocavTa TO TAH- 
/ aS 
Qos Kaka eipyacpévot eis TOUT avaicOncias Kai 
, / e/ , ¢ \ bf wae J foal 
TOAMNS TpoEANAVGacLW wa oO péVv oOleTat dt’ ExEivoY 
¢ > ¢ na / ¢ \ / \ >] 
vd vyav cwOncecOat, 6 S€ tapaxabyntat Kal ov 


/ lal JA > > / 
KaTadveTat Tois Tempaypévols. oUT@ O ov povor Ets 


; ™ of rwes Z Bens. Bekk. cum SYTOr. 
" érowjOnoav om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum >. ° robrwy Bekk. 
P ris 5€ wodews Z Bekk. Bens. cum 2. 


§ 181. || Androt, §.73 om. § 183. || Androt. § 75 eis 
mporepov...émt Tats piddaus 0’... Xejuara dvacdns [though on the 
§ 182. || Androt. § 74 corre- whole the hiatus is more fre- 


sponds to a letter. quent in this speech: see on 


75 


/ 


234 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 184-186. 


li b] ’ 

xpymaT avaidys, adda Kal oKalds EoTWW WOT OUK 
a > al a 

oldev éxelivo, bTt oTépavor pév Eioly apETHS onpeElor, 

cal U \ / 

didrat 5é Kal Ta ToladTa TovTOV, Kal aTEpavos 
/ - 

bev amas, Kav piKpos 4, THY tony iroTiiay exes 
al U b] / J x ’ av \ lal 

TO peyaro, exTopata 8  Ovupratnpia n Ta ToLadTa 

/ 

KTNpaTa, av pev vTepBartdryn TO WAIVE, TAOVTOV 

\ ‘ / al , +\ Pa b] \ 

tia doéav Tpocetpiipato Tois KexTnmEvols, Edy O él 

lal 15 RN J > / na n 

Mikpolts ceuvivnTal Tis, TOTOUT amTexEL TOU TLMS 

a a ’ \ 

twos Sia tadta Tvyely WoT aTrELpOKAaXOS TPOS 

édo€ev" eivar. 
/ \ an / / \ be / 

KTN MATA TA TOD TAOUTOV TeTTOinTAL MiKpa Kal avakia 


nr / 
ovtos Toivuy dvedkov ta THs do0&ns 

id a \ TAP 9 a 3 3 vA \ \ U 
buav. Kal ovd éxeiv eidev, OTL TpOS pev KPHUaT@V 

a > ’ c A ’ t \ \ , 
KThoW ovdeTw@TrOTE 6 OHpMos EaTrovdace, Tpos Sé OdENS 
¢ 2O\ A «ah a ” / /, r 
ws ovdée Tpds ev TOY AdAdwv. TeKunpLoy Sé* ypT- 
\ \ a a ¢ / \ \ 
pata, mev yap TAEtoTa TOV EAAnvwv Tote cyov 

> b] , 

aimave vrép pirotipias avyndwoev, vrép bé So&ns 
> / > a > / >] / / / b] / 
eiogépwv éx Tov idiwy ovdéva motrote Kivduvor é£é- 
97? @ , 2 97 p) , OA t \ \ 
ad ov Ktnpat abavat’ avT@ Tepicoti, TA ev 

rn »” e / \ lal b] an 
TOV épyov 7 wynun, Ta SE TOV avabnpatav Tov eT” 
éxelvors oTalévTwy TO KaAXOS, TpoTUAALA TAaDTA, 6 


OTN. 


\ \ / > > / / OX 
TmapGevav, cToal, vedcotKol, ovK aupopicKot SVO OvVdE 
“puaides TéTTApES 1) TPES, AyouTa ExaoTH mar, as, 
ivf Py n / / 3 r ’ 
dTav cot SoKh, Tari yparrers KaTaYwvevEly™. Ov 

\ 
yap éavtous Sexatevovtes, ovd & KaTapacawT ay ot 
> \ a a / \ > \ 
€yOpot trovodytes, Sudas mpatTovTes Tas eiaopopas, 
nr ’ 
tadT avéGecay, ovd oidamep® cv ypwmevot cvpBov- 
4 mpocédoéevy Z Bekk. Bens. cwm libris. 
r ds...xataxwveve om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum DkrsA’ et pr. T. 
® oloiamep Z Bens. cum libris. 


§ 113]...dy pér...xal ovx vudv xKryuara dbdavara air@ [two bad 


déiva.—tTogovr améxer, Androt. 
§2n. 

§ 184. || Androt. § 76 elcgé- 
pew & éx Trav idlwy ovdéva mi- 
more Kiviuvov vmrép doéns eféoT7... 


hiatus]...00 maduv. 

§ 185. || Androt. § 77 ov yap 
auTous,. 

ovd’ oldamep od] Here all MSS. 
preserve the true reading oloc- 


758 


186 


235 


P. 758. | KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


’ \ A 3 \ Le 
ows €mrodLTEVOVTO, aXAXG TOUS €yOpovs KpaTodYTES, 
\ \ a x > al bd \ , > 
kat & Tas Tis av ed hpovav evEaiTO, THY TOK Els 
¢ / v 3 U / e a“ / 
Omovotay GyovTes, AOavatov KNEos aVTaV AEAOiTTAGCL, 
r a ~ an 
Tous émuiTndevovtas oid cot BeBiwtat THs ayopas 
” ¢ a 8 > = a 2 v 5 "AG 
elpyovtes. vpeis 8 els tocovTOY, & avdpes n- 
a rf 6 t ’ 6 / \ e 6 / e/ ? joe 
vaiot, mponxOnt* evnbeias Kal pabupias dat ovdé 
rn lal nan ’ > 
TowavT éyovTes Tapabelypata TavTa pipeicbe, aXAr 
a > / 
‘Avdpotiov viv Toutetwv émicKkevactns, Avépotior, 
3 n \ / \ nm > , »” , 
@ yn Kal Geol. Kai todr acéBnua érXatTov Tivos 
“a la) “ \ e 
nyetabe; eyo pev yap nyotmar Seiv Tov eis (epa eic- 
a c “ 
lovTa Kat yepviBwv Kai Kavav arpopevoy, Kal THs 
‘ ’ 
Mpos Tors Geovds émipedelas TpocTaTHY Eaomevoy ovyXt 
\ ¢ lal > \ Ly , ’ \ \ / 
TAKTOV nuEepav apiOuov aryvevelv, adda Tov Biov 
, / 
nryvevKéval TOLOUTMY émiTNSevuaTav ola TovTw Be- 
Biwrat. 


* arponxOe Bens. cum >. 


mep, wrongly altered from con- 
jecture. Androt. $64 n. 

§ 186. Androt. § 78 els rovr’ 
© avdpes...rovaira éxovres...mpoet- 
pnuévov nuepwv apiOuor. 

§§ 187—-189. I might say 
much more of Androtion and his 
expected defence of Timocrates: 
but I will not pursue that subject. 
To return to Timocrates: he 
says, I am told, that the three 
ambassadors have paid the mo- 
ney, and as they have satisfied 
the demands of justice, it would 
be cruel to convict him. But it 
is not open to him to argue in 
this way: it only lands him in 
a dilemma. If he proposed his 
law for the benefit of these men, 
that is of itself illegal: the law 
must be the same for all citizens. 
If for the general good, the fact 
that these men have paid is irre- 
levant: it must be shown that 


the law is expedient and right. 
This is just the point that the 
prosecution deny, and which the 
jury are now called to decide. 

§ 187. We have now reached 
the last of the critical points 
discussed in the Introduction, 
as to the series juncturaque of 
this Speech. According to Ben- 
seler, as has been seen, the 
genuine speech is resumed after 
an extensive interpolation, be- 
ginning with § 110, including 
the whole of the extracts from 
the Androtion §§ 160—186, and 
ending only with the first sen- 
tence of this section, as zav- 
couat. According to Blass’s 
more conservative criticism, 
agreeing, except in a few minor 
points, with that of A. Schaefer, 
the break here is merely that 
between portions of the first and 
of the second recension, each 


236 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 187-189. 


Kai epi mév tovtov’ Kata ayorny’ & dé Tyo- 


r a \ , a4 \ Uy bg 
KpaTelL TvVEpEl, TOAKG AEYELV ETL TPOS TOUTOLS EXwV 


TAVCOMAL. 


oida 8 bT6, as pev ovK aavppopos Upiv 


€oTi 6 vomos Kal Tapa Tavras Tovs vomous eloEvn- 


, \ \ ' > aww ” B) ¢ ¥ 
veymévos Kal KaTa TavT adikws Exwv, .ovy Feu 


Y rovrwy Bekk. cum libris praeter =. 


proceeding from the hand of 
Demosth. but wanting his final 
touches. 

Kal mepl wey Tovrov KaTa& oXO- 
jv] tovrov referring to An- 
drotion, the reading of 2, is 
less vague and unsatisfactory 
than rovrwy: but at best the 
passage is disjointed enough, 
and the transition very ill- 
managed, We have just heard 
a long invective against Andro- 
tion, repeated from the former 
spéech : and now the orator says 
that he will return to the sub- 
ject ‘ by and by,’ or ‘at leisure.’ 
The difficulty of the phrase xara 
oxoAnv may be partly got over, 
by adopting, with Whiston, a 
suggestion of Sauppe’s, mrepi uév 
Tovrov kal Tay KaTa gXoAnY, and 
connecting Ta Kara oxoAnv with 
TotovTous Adyous cxoAnY dyovTa 
éoxépOa § 158: a sneer at the 
‘elaborate’ speech on. which 
Timocrates is counting for his 
acquittal. But this reading in 
itself involves the acknowledg- 
ment of a serious corruption of 
the text: and the abruptness of 
the passage is still very harsh 
and, in my opinion, unlike the 
real work of Demosth. We are 
not bound to determine pre- 
cisely the limits of the spurious 
passages, if we say that, while 
we do not accept the whole of 
Benseler’s sweeping excision, 
the conclusion is forced upon us 
that in this speech we find work 


which, after making every al- 
lowance for Demosthenes’ want 
of interest in it after the trial 
had ended, cannot be supposed 
to have been published by him 
in its present shape. As Blass 
himself admits, passages which 
imply that the money had not 
been paid are mixed up almost 
inextricably with others like the 
present, which plainly assert the 
contrary. This want of co- 
herence had been remarked even 
in ancient times: rivés Aéyoucwv 
é€x TouTov voulfecOac tov dyov 
dovorarov, is the remark of the 
Scholiast on éxrérisrar Ta xp7- 
para. There is not, in the entire 
Demosthenic collection, another 
example of a long extract of 
several pages repeated from 
a previous speech—the case of 
the Fourth Philippic is quite 
different—nor of a speech in 
which the existence of two re- 
censions is so clearly proved by 
contradictions as to one of the 
leading points of the case, the 
payment or non-payment of the 
money by the ambassadors. 
Scarcely any of the matter of 
the speech, taken section by 
section, seems unworthy of De- 
mosthenes: but the effect of the 
whole is to give an impression 
of confused arrangement which 
we cannot suppose to have pro- 
ceeded from him. The conclu- 
sion seems to be that there were 
really two distinct. speeches, or 


p.759.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 237 


, b] , > 9. Po € > f RS. f 
Néyeww* adKovw  avrov Eye WS EKTETLTTAL TA YpPN- 
. / \ / \ 
pata Avdpotiov cal VravKétn cai MedavoTe, Kat 
. , > A > 
OTe Sewotat av abo. TavToV avOporrw)r, et TreTrOLN- 
t > / \ / ¢ \ . 4 Ceo." [ae ” 
KOT@Y éxeivov Ta dikata, UTEP WY avTos aitiav éxeEl 7 
al ; ¢€ / b] \ \ 
188 Oeivac Tov vomov, uNdeV NTTOV AUTOS ANicKOLTO. eyw OE 
\ rie a ¢ An rn 52 Q A , ee. 
TOV AOYOV NYyoUpal TOVTOV OVOE KAO EV NE YeELY EvEelWatL 
, > \ \ ¢ \ , \ \ / 
ToUT@. eb wey Yap UITép TOUTMY, Os TA TpooTjKoVTE 
/ an r \ n 
dys memounKévat, Oeivat Tov vopov omoroyels, KAT 
at a Ul ¢ / a vA \ / 
éxeivo mpoonker c€ dNicKer Oat havepas, OTL pur) TLOE- 
\ ,’ a a 
Val Vvomov, éav. wy TOV avTov él Tact Tots TONTALS, 
’ \ 
avTiKpus ol KUplol vomot AéyovaL, KAM ods ovTOL 
\ a a / 
189 Oukacew OpwpudKaciv. ef S€ TOU Tact auudépovTOS 
2 na A / \ / \ ” 
évexa TavTa vowoleTnaar dyoets, wn-eye THY ExTLCW 
\ / ‘ xO \ \ n a ‘ n = ’ 5] 
THY TOUT@Y’ OUVdEY Yap KOWMVEL TH VOU THLE’ AAR 
Lal ld an 
ws émiTndeds ott Kal KadX@s ExwY 6 Vvopos, TODTO 
n / > ~ Le \ e \ a 
didacKke. TovTO yap éoO Virép ov ov pév eiceveyKetv 
/ b] / an 
ys, eyo Sé yéypaypat tavaytia dackwr, Kpivas 6é 
2 / Y nm 3 
Tpoonkel TovToVal. KalTOL Kal TOUT OvK aTropHcaLL 


a new recension of the speech 
owing to the turn taken by 
affairs: but that the welding of 
these two speeches into one is 
not to be ascribed to Demo- 
sthenes himself. 

éxrérioTat Ta Xpnuata ’Avdpo- 
tlw] The dative of the agent 
(for vzd Tivos) is almost confined 
to the perf. pass. With the 
participle of that tense it is the 
usual construction, e.g. rev col 
mempayyevev Demosth. F. L. p. 
434 § 291=333 would almost 
always take the place of rap 
urd cov mempayuévwv: with the 
indicative both constructions 
are found. Cf. Madvig, Synt. 
§ 38. 

TeTOLNKOTW...Ta Sixara] ‘ have 
satisfied the demands of jus- 
tice,’ K. Perhaps rather, ‘have 


complied with the law,’ as in 
§ 52 moety ra Sikaa ovyn. So 
in the next section ta mpoon- 
KovTa pys memoinkévat. 

airtay éxec] This is the usual 
passive of airiaéc@a: the only 
tense of the verb used passively 
is the aor. yridOyny, and that 
very rarely: Thucyd. vu. 68 
§ 2, Xen. Hell. rm. 1 § 32. 

§ 188. pr riOévac... Néyover] 
‘the existing laws expressly for- 
bid.’ In this sense \éyew with 
a negative is rare, dravyopevew 
is far more common; or as in 
Androt. § 8 dvappydnv ovk éay. 

§ 189. éyw 6 yéypaunat] 
‘whereas I have impeached it 
and assert the contrary,’ that it 
is ovx émirndecos, contrary to 
public policy. 


238 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [8§ 190-193. 


a val \ z , 
av Seifat, TavTa “adXOV 7) KATA TOUS VOMOUS TreTTOLN- 
0 es \ 
févous TV ExTLOLY EKEIVOUS THY TOV KpnuaT@OV’ ara 
\ \ , ¢ lal > / \ a 4 Ps lal 
hn) Tept TOUT@Y vue oicovTaY THY ~hpov, Ti det 
ral ~ / 
TavTa éyovTa évoyrEiv pe VUVE ; 
5 , > \ 1O ] / ’ / 0 ef 
Oipac toivuy avtov ovd éxeivwv adpéEerOar tév 
/ B) 
Aoyor, os Seva av abot, ef yparvas OTTas “AOnvaiwv 
Yov, 
; b] / \ 'é 
pndels SceOnoeTar avTos TeiceTal TL KaKOV, Kal OTL 


190 


TODS VOMOUS WS TPaoTAaTOUS Kal pEeTPLwWTATOUS Elvas 
€_yc4 a > / U 24-2 / N 8) \ 
Urép Tav advvdtav pariot éotiv. mpos dy Tovs 
, 
ToLovTous Adyous BéXTLOV TrpoaKnKoeval* piKpa Tav- 
ee f> @ bd lal ¢/ \ \ f 

tas vas, WW Arrov éEatratdcbe. bTav pév yap én, 
¢ > 

oTws pnodels SeOnocetat “AOnvaiwy, pn AavOavéto 
wrevdopevos Uuds. ov yap ToUTO TéELKeVv, GAN Srws 760 
Upels akupot TOV TpocTinnuatwy écecbe’ Kal THY 


1gI 


* axnkoévac Bens. cum =. 


mayvTa paddov...Tav XpnuaTwv] 
‘that the payment which those 
men have made is anything but 
a payment according to law.’ 

§§ 190—193. Again, he is 
raising a false issue when he 
tries to pose as the martyr of 
humane and popular legislation, 
and says that the humbler classes 
are those who benefit most by 
lenient laws. When he states 
the object of his law to be ‘ that 
no Athenian may be imprison- 
ed,’ this is false: for his real 
object is that you may lose the 
power to inflict additional pe- 
nalties. Don’t let him pick out 
for quotation these expressions 
in his law which sound most 
humane, but do you judge it as 
a whole (191). There are two 
classes of things to which the 
laws of all states have reference : 
the acts and contracts of private 
persons, and the conduct of 


public. men (192). It is your 
interest that the former class of 
laws should be framed with mild- 
mess and humanity, but that 
those which concern our public 
duties should be stringent and 
severe: for then you will suffer 
the least amount of wrong from 
your statesmen (193). 

§ 190. dévvdrwr] § 135 n. 

mpoaxnkoévat| ‘that youshould 
at once hear beforehand,’ § 60 


nN. 

§ 191. XAéyy, dws] ‘when he 
says the words “in order that 
no Athenian may be imprison- 
ed:”’ or ypayae or TeOexévac 
may be supplied. 

AavOavérw Pevddpevos vuas] i.e. 
AavOavérw vuas. WevderOa with 
acc.=étararay is almost con- 
fined to poetry: there is an ex- 
ample in Xenophon, but that is 
not saying much,—zpooriwnua- 
Tw, §2n, 


P. 760.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 239 


ge? Spxou Kal Aoyou Kal Kpicews Whhov évynveypévny 
avad.ikov Kabiornaw. pn dn TavO viv TOV éx TOD 
vomov pnuatov éxréEas AeyéTw, & hiravOpwrotar 
€otlv adxovoat’ aX brov Secxvitw Tov vopov é€Ns, 
kal Ta ocupBaivort’ evpn- 
aeTe yap TaDT bvTa & eyo’ déyo, Kal ovy & hyow 
oUTOS. GANA pany TPES YE TO TOLS TrOANO’S TUMPéepeLY 
TOUS vomous TMpaous Kai peTplous eivar TAdE yp) TKO- 
éotw, © avdpes “AOnvaior, dvo etdn, trept ov 


> ? an a 7 
€& avtTov ocKorTrely €ato. 
192 


TEL, 
? € t \ / Z \ , so. \ / 
elolv of vomol KaTa Tacas” Tas TONES’ OY TO pév 
/ 
éott, Ot dv ypepwela addAnrols Kal cVVAaAXNATTOMEY 
A \ \ al 
Kal twept Tav Wlwvy & ypn Troety SuwpicpeOa Kal 
a e n t 
Edpuev OKwS Ta TpOS nMads avTovs, TOO, Ov TPdToOV 
a a a BA a lal 
Sei TO KoW@ THs TOAEwS Eva ExacTov nuav yphobat, 
x / / \ A / fal ’ 
av TodTever Oar BovrAynTat Kai dn KyndecOat THs To- 
/ \ / 
193 Aews. €xelvous péev TolvuY TOS VomoUS, Tors Tepl 


Y ravrad éyo Zecum =. ravd’ ay Bens. 
* xaé’ amrdoas Z Bekk. Bens, cum =F vy. 


pel’ Bpxov Kal Advyou Kal xpl- 
sews] ‘upon oath, and after 
argument and trial.’ 

avaiixkoy Kabiornow] ‘he ren- 
ders subject to an appeal.’ § 54 
n, and Dict. Antiq. s.v. ‘Ap- 
pellatio’ (Greek). 

§ 192. duo etén] ‘there are 
two classes of things with which 
the laws deal’ R. W. This is 
more precise than ‘to which 
the laws have reference,’ which 
would be zrepi a. 

be ay xpdpeba] i.e. dy (eldav) 
7d pev éorl mepl wy eiclv oi vomor 
5c Gv xpapueda: the second ay 
refers not to eléy but to oi 
vouot. The passage is well ren- 
dered by R. W.: ‘the first are 
the subject of the laws by which 
we regulate our intercourse and 


contracts with one another, and 
define our obligations in private 
matters, and generally our re- 
lations to each other in life; 
the second (of those which) 
determine the nature of the 
obligations which each of us 
owes to the state, if he would be 
a public man and professes to 
care for the state.’ For cvva)- 
Adrrew ‘to contract’ cf. 1, Onet. 
p- 867 § 12 rovotro mpayua ovr- 
adX\arrev, and cuvdd\Aayua be- 
low § 213. 

dtwwpicuefa] The middle of 
this verb is far more common 
than the active in the Orators, 
but the perf. mid. diwpicuac is 
rare. We find in 1. Onet. p. 
877 § 8 dioxiAlwv wev wdpicuévos 
Thy oiklav, raddvrovu 5é Td xwplor. 


240 KATA TIMOKPATOYS. [§§ 194, 195. 


a ? ee €_% 
TOV idiwy, nriws KeloOat Kal diriavOpedreas Urép TOV 
n S a \ \ / 
TodAev €otl’ Tovade SE Tos Tepl TOY Tpds TO SNuO- 
tal ¢ Bt 
ciov Tovvavtiov, iaxupas Kal yareTras exyew vIrép 
pe ) BPE: \ AN ad ’ ¢ / 
Upav é€otiv’ ovTw yap av HKic@ ot TodrTEVOmEVOL 
\ A's. | Ce ss oe . ae \ 0 ay! 
TovS TOAAOVS Vuas adicoiev. OTaV dn TOUT TO AOYO. 
A na ? n \ I] 
XpnTat, éml TavTAa atravTaTe, OTL TOs VOmoUS OUK 
Tee eae Se, ES 77 mn 9 \ tok 
€xelVOUS TOUS UTEP UVMOV TPaous Trolel, AAAA TOVGbE 
ob Tots TrodtTevopevais PoBov Trapéyovew. | 
e 
TloAXa & dv tis Eyou Néyerv, ei nal’ Exactov ov 
na n é 
épet Sexvevat BovrovTo evaxiopod Kal TapaKpov- 


194 


§ 193. ovTw yap ay...adixoter] 
A characteristic passage: this 
deep distrust of public men goes 
down to the very roots of Athe- 
nian life. On the prevailing 
dishonesty which in some de- 
gree justified it, see above § 79 
n. 
émt tavra amavrare] ‘meet 
him with this reply,’ cf. § 38 
ep’ éxdoryy dravta Thy 6ddv THY 
aounpuarwy. A still nearer pa- 
rallel is Mid. p. 563 § 151 (of 
the friends of Midias) ov« éré)- 
pow évyew, érl Tatra & arnvTwr, 
‘had recourse to this argument 
in his defence.’ 

éxeivous] ‘the former class,’ 
rovode ‘ the latter.’ 

§§ 194—199. Of the many 
points as to which he will try to 
deceive you I will mention only 
one. Just see if he can con- 
vince you that retroactive legis- 
lation respecting what has been 
judicially settled can ever be 
right (194). If, as is probable, 
you feel that it cannot, then 
consider what alone can have 
induced him to propose such a 
law. Nothing but the most 
abominable avarice (195). He 
cannot say that it was out of 


compassion for Androtion and. 


his fellows; for their own con- 
duct was such as to excite in- 
dignation rather than pity, and 
he is not so remarkably kind and 
gentle after all (196), as is 
proved by the acts of oppression 
of which he was guilty as the 
colleague and accomplice of An- 
drotion during their year of 
office (197). He should rather 
have had pity upon you, from 
whom he and Androtion have 
exacted double payments while 
themselves not contributing any- 
thing to the property tax (198). 
He and Androtion entered their 
accounts alone, not with their 
colleagues, so confident were they 
of impunity. And he has no 
interest forsooth, no personal 
object to serve, when he incurs 
your hatred and introduces laws 
contrary to all the rest, nay even 
to a former law of his own (199). 

§ 194. gevaxicuov Kal mapa- 
Kpovcews] Comp. below § 209, 
Aristocr. p. 656 § 107 é¢eva- 
kio@nre Kat mapexpovoOnre. The 
verbs are favourites with De- 
mosth. (Androt. § 34 n.): the 
substantives are rare, but geva- 
kisuos occurs de Pace p. 59 § 10, 
mapaxpovois Aristocr. p. 679 § 
175. 


P. 761.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 241 


cews Evera pnOnoomeva. adda Ta ev TOAAA Tapy- 
aw, Keparatoy & viv O pynuovevoete ép@. oKoTretT 


> A an , ¢ / x / yy , 
€v amact Tois AOyots, OTOGOUS av Aéyn, el TL SuVN- 


a a z 
_ oeTas ToLovTor eiTrety, Ot ov SidaEEL Ws EaTL Sikatov 


195 


\ f. \ 

Tov TUWévTa vomov TavTa TpocTaéat Trepl THY Trape- 

AnAvOdTwv Kai TpoTepoy TéXOsS eayNKOTaV TroLeEtY Kal 

, / 

TEepl TOV MEAAOVTMV yernoeTOaL’ TavTeV yap bYTOV 
> A 

aicxypav Kal Sewav Tav yeypaypévar ev TH vouo, 

TOUTO SewvoTaToV Kal WadioTa Tapavopov yéypaTrTal. 
> \ ‘gf e fi- 3 <P \ lal a , 

el 6é un ovTos unt adXos pnodels TOdTO® SuvnceTar 
a / A / 

Setar, eidévat ypn” cadpds devaxilopévous’, Kal do- 
7 \ eee. , 2 / oS 2A 

yiSerOat mpos vuds avTovs éx Tivos ToT ém7HnrOe 

TOUT@ ToLaDTAa VomoleTEiv. ov Tpotka, & TimoKpaTes, 
/ 34) > / an Cal » \ / e 

mo0ev; ovd orlyou Set TovTov EOnkas Tov vopov 
5N-- 7 \ EK 9 AA ” a > A 

ovdepiav yap av eitreiy Exows GAAnV Tpodacy, de’ Hv 
A te a ax n 

ToLovToV é€mnpOns eiceveyKety Vosov, 7) THY TaUTOD 


® rovro post ei S¢ transp. Z Bekk. 
b add kal cunmévac Z Bekk. om. TATOKrs. © add vuds Z Bekk. 


fore moA\ov in the latter. It 
will be found that in all these 
passages a negative has pre- 
ceded : the distinction is that 
in ovdé woddov Set the ovdé does 


mept Twv mapernrvbdTwv] This 
argument is now getting rather 
threadbare: we have had it 
already §§ 42—44, 56—58, 72 
—76. For the phraseology cf. 


§ 73 wepl & dv &ixacrnpiov éyvwKe 
kal TéXos éoxnKe. 

§ 195. 2é0ev;] interjected as 
in § 157. . 

ovd’ édlyou Sef] Here and in 
two other passages, pro Mega- 
lop. p. 206 § 16 and F. L., p. 
399 § 184=204, the meaning 
‘far from it’ is expressed by 
this phrase instead of the much 


more common ovdé moAXov de? 


(de reb. in Chers. p. 100 § 42, 
de F. L. p. 350 § 30=33 and 
elsewhere). The old commenta- 
tors (as Jerome Wolf) explained 
the former class of passages by 
ov’ éXlyou Se?, d\Ad mroAdov: and 
were perplexed by the ovdé be- 


W. Dz 


not negative what follows, but 
merely repeats the previous ne- 
gation: whereas in ovd’ é6Xlyou 
det the ovdé does really negative 
odtyov. I cannot think with 
Shilleto (on F. L. § 204) that 
the presence or absence of ye 
would render the meaning 
doubtful: as he observes, ‘ov 
dé (i.e. ov Kal) éAlyou ye det is 
precisely equivalent to mod ov 
ye xal de7.? It is curious that 
the use of mo\Xosres and 6r- 
yooros has occasioned a similar 
difficulty: see the next sec- 
tion. 

émnpOns| ‘you were led on, 
induced, encouraged’ to bring 


16 


242 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 196, 197. 


Oeois eyOpav aicypoxépdeiav’ ovTe ydp auyyevis 

OUT oiKelos OUT avayKaios HY Gol ToVTwY OvOEIs, 
yo 4 ? &-.9., (x By > a ¢ / P) \ Ul 

ovo“ éxeiv’ av Exous eitrety, ws ENenoas Sewad Tacxov- 


tas avOp@rous eidou dia TadtTa BonOeiv avtois. ove 
‘ a v 
yap TO° TA TOUTWY TOAADTTHO Ypovw OAS aKOVTAS, 


4 ofr’ Z Bens. Bekk. cum =FYrB. 
€ 76 om. Z Bekk. Bens. cwm 2Tkrsv. 


in this law: ‘ veranlasst’ Ben- 
seler. In K.’s rendering, ‘ pre- 
text for introducing such a bill,’ 
this word is not expressed. 

feots éxOpav alcxpoxépdecav] It 
is from this passage that @eac- 
ex%piav Androt. § 59 (where see 
the note) has been altered in 
most MSS. There are no vari- 
ous readings here, except that = 
writes, as elsewhere, aicypoxep- 
diav: and this form, though 
contrary to analogy, has been 
accepted by Dindorf (Praef. ed. 
3 p. xxvill). Cobet Misc. Crit. 


' p. 25 wishes to read Oeo.rex Opiav 


here in conformity with || An- 
drot.: but there can be no ne- 
cessity for this. : 

ovre yap auyyevns ov7’ oilxeios 
ovr’ avaykaios| ‘either a rela- 
tive or a connexion or an inti- 
mate friend’ K. ‘Ein Verwand- 
ter oder Bekannter von dir oder 
stand dir irgendwie nahe’ Ben- 
seler. Compare above ovyye- 
vow Kal olkelwv § 67 n. 

§ 196. 7d Tovrwy] sc. xp7- 
para, apparently the money of 
the jury as representing the 
state. This is Reiske’s explana- 
tion, approved by Dindorf: cf. 
in the next section rourwvl. Ben- 
seler’s version takes no. notice 
of rorwv. In Nicostr. p. 1254 
§§ 26, 27 we have dudicByrodv- 
Tos Tav vuerépwy of a claim not 
yet proved on behalf of the 
state: cf. above § 175 n. 


TodrooT@ xpdvm] moddooTds 
has two meanings which at first 
sight appear contradictory. (1) 
One out of many, and so small 
in proportion to the whole; as 
a fraction with a large denomi- 
nator is a small fraction. This 
is the usual sense, found gene- 
rally but not always with pépos 
or wépcov: as in 111, Phil. p. 117 
§ 25 éddrrova éoriv...ddr’ ovde 
mwo\dooTov pépos TovTwy éxelva. 
c. Macart. p. 1052 § 9 dAN’ odd’ 
amodoyjoacbal wo. ééervyévero ovbé 
modNoorbv mépos wy kareWevdovTo 
nuagv: ‘the smallest part.’ (2) 
As applied to time, only in 7rod- 
oora xpdvw ‘after a long time,’ 
‘so long after it was due’ K. 
The phrase occurs also c. Eu- 
bul. p. 1304 § 18 mpéds rods olkel- 
ous éo0n Sedpo roddooTG Xpovw: 
and Aristoph. Pac. 559. Reiske 
was struck with the difficulty of 
reconciling the two meanings: 
‘hic non minuit, sed auget.’ 
On this G. H. Schaefer remarks 
that it always implies number, 
‘ut semper sit avénrixdv, nun- 
quam pewrikdy;’ and here it 
means ‘at one moment out of 
many,’ implying many moments 
or, in other words, a long time. 
This usage was probably poet- 
ical in its origin: besides the 
line of Aristophanes, it will be 
observed that the passage just 
quoted from the Eubulides reads 
as a-‘fragment of an iambic 


oS 


P. 762.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 243 


év toprol é&edeyyOevtas Sixacrnplows, Katatiévat, 
TOOe nynow TO Seiwa TacxeL civat’ Tovey yap éaTt 
TOUTO ye Seiad, Kal TapoEVVELEe WadXOY ay TLVa bLGELD 
) TpoTpéwecev Eeciv’ OVT GANws Tpdos Kal pirav- 
Opwros at Tis THY GAXaV Siahopas wv €decis avTOUs" 
ov yap éote THs avTis Wuyis “Avdpotiova pev Kal 
Meravwerov cat Traveérnv’ édeciv, & Krévavtes 
elyov et KataOncovat, TovTwVi Sé ToTOVT@Y SyT@Y Kal 
TOV AXNOV TOMTAY, wY él Tas oiklas éEBadibes ad 
Tovs évdeKka Kal TOs aTodéKTas Exav Kal Tods UTN- 
pétas, pndéva TwTOT edXeHoal, AAdad Ovpas adatpeiv 
Kat oTpopal’ vrocrdy Kal Suaxovoy, el Tis*® exypyTo, 


£ Travxérny xal MedAdywrov Bekk. cum libris praeter =F v. 
& 7 rts Bens. cum XAFrs. 


verse. Itis found only in the dicastery, are each reckoned as 


dative case: a writer would na- 
turally say modvdv xpévov, not 
moddoordv, of the duration of a 
long time, but 7o\\ogr@ when a 
particular moment of that long 
time was intended. It seems 
however that Soph. Antig. 625 
mpdcce. 5’ dd\vyoorov xpévor éxrods 
aras is a bold extension of this 
poetic usage from the point of 
time to its duration. The more 
we realise Sophocles’ love of 
artificial expression, the less, I 
think, shall we be inclined to 


desert the MSS. in favour of — 


the commonplace 6Xly.orov. 

pods adxovras] These words 
add to the rhetorical devdrns of 
the passage: they paid the mo- 
ney (1) at the latest possible 
moment (2) after making many 
difficulties and (3) with the 
worst possible grace. 

év tptolv ébeXeyxOévras diKxa- 
ornptas] The mpoBovr\evma of 
the senate, the Wpicua of the 
people, and the verdict of the 


oxetn pépew § 57. 


a judicial decree affirming the 
liability of Androtion and his 
fellows. So A. Schaefer 1. 332 
n., followed by Benseler and 
Whiston. 

mwoeiv yap éoTt ToOTd ye Seiwa] 
movety is emphatically opposed 
to wadcxew: ‘it was cruel con- 
duct you mean, not cruel treat- 
ment.’ 

§ 197. &@ KréWavres cixov ef 
karadnoouct] ‘for having to re- 
fund what they had embezzled 
and were still keeping.’ After 
éXectv, as after Gavudfey, ef im- 
plies no ‘if’ but points to a 
fact: cf. § 32 n. 

amodéxras] § 162 n. 

Ovpas...vroomday] ‘to have torn 
off their doors and dragged the 
bed-clothes from under them.’ 
Cf. Androt. § 56 and the phrase 
It seems 
from the mention of doors that 
not only furniture but fixtures 
might be seized under a dis- 
traint at Athens. . . 


16—2 


76 


199 


244 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 198-200. 


, ? / ge hth \ 7S, at / b) bf 
TavTny éveyupatvew* & ov TavT €oieis éviavTov 
t/ ~ 1) / ol) \ U 
OdXov pet ’Avdpotiwvos. moANw yap Ontov oxeTAE- 
, cae / + ined a \ \ A x > U 
WTEp émraayed UMELS, KAL TTOAV fLudAOY AV ELKOTWS 
] / ‘ \ eS 3 a oy / \ / 
NA€ELS TOUTOUS, of Ov Uuds, O KaTAapaTe, TOS Aéyor- 
a / 
Tas ovo OTLody Elo depovTEs TavovTal. Kal OUVK aTro- 
na 9? > \ 4 ~ / \ af? 
xpn TOUT, GAA Kai SiTAA TpaTTovTa, Kal TadO 
n . / ¢ 
vd cov Kal ’Avdpotiwvos, ot piav eiadhopav™ ovde- 
TWTOT ELTEVNVOYATE. THALKOUTO Toivuv éeppovnaeV 
e ¢ Lee d OX / , ] / , aA 
oUTOS ws dp ovdé Oienv ToVT@V Ovdcmiay SHC, OTE 


h play eiogopay, uiav Z Bens. cum =. 


dudKovorv...... évexupdgew] For 
the acc. with évexupdfev see 
note on Androt. l.c. Slaves 
were among the first ‘ cattle’ or 
‘ chattels’ distrained upon: the 
argument in Or. 53 mpds Nixo- 
oTparov mepl dvdpamddwy azro- 
yeas ’ApePovelov turns upon a 
schedule or inventory (da7o- 
ypagy) in which two slaves are 
stated to be the property of Are- 
thusius, and therefore liable to 
confiscation as a partial pay- 
ment of his debt to the public 
treasury, while Nicostratus the 
brother of Arethusius has collu- 
sively claimed them as his own, 
a case of ‘concealment of effects 
in bankruptcy.’ There can be 
no doubt that éxp7ro is rightly 
explained as ‘used with a double 
meaning, or at any rate euphe- 
mistically for a plainer term = 
mrnougew’ (R. W.). I do not 
think, however, that the Scho- 
liast is right in referring under 
this head to the case of Sinope 
and Phanostrata in Androt. l.c.: 
they appear to have been free 
women whose goods, not per- 
sons had been seized (avOpwarous 
mopvas, ov mévTor dpetovoas elo- 
gopas). The MS. authority is 
decisive in favour of 7 tts éxp7- 


To, which yields exactly the 
same sense as eé7? Tis. 

éviavtov Bov] The year in 
which they held the office of 
éxoyets, § 160 and || Androt. 

§ 198. wvpels...réers Tovrous 
.. .UBas...Tovs Néyovras] Through 
these rapid changes of pronoun 
the meaning is plain: ‘you, the 
Athenian people, were much 
worse treated:? ‘you, Timo- 
crates, had much more reason 
to pity your countrymen, who 
through you orators have no res- 
pite from payment of property- 
tax.’ 

dirdAa mpdtrovra] ‘they are 
made to pay double.’ ‘To ex- 
act’ is either mparrew or mpar- 
rec0a. indiscriminately: and 
the verb, which in the active 
voice takes a double accusative 
(rparrew ria 7) is regularly 
joined to a single accusative 
when used passively. The same 
statement occurs above § 185 
and || Androt., durdds rparrovres 
Tas ela opas. 

§ 199. rndLKobro.. .eppovncer] 
‘such was his self-confidence,’ 
‘ Selbstvertrauen,’ Benseler. ry- 
Axodro ppovetv is precisely =ov- 
Tw méya ppovety, 


200 


P. 762.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 245 


aw a a 
povos Séxa THY cuVapYoVTaY bVT@Y KOLWH TOV Adyov 
> , : ee) / 3 / . a \ 
éyypavrat pet “Avdpotiwvos érodpnoe’ tTpoika yap, 
IQO\ 3 , € A , 3 U 
ovdev wherovmevos, vuiv Tiuoxparns amexOaverar 
Kat vomous eiodépes tao évavtiovs, TO TeXEUTAToV 
\ \ ¢ a / / \ \ \ > lal +99 
O€ Kal aUTOD Vo“w TpOTépw, 0 wa THY “AOnvadv ovd 
e lal 
Uuas oiwat NavOavewv. 
A / v & val ‘ o 8 b] fal 5 
O tolvuy Emouye Soxet parior aéEov opyhs eivat, 
’ \ > > / od WU, ae 
dpacw Kal ovK amotpéWouat, OTs TadT w@ avdpes 
Cal > 
’"AOnvaio, mpatTev ém apyupiv, Kal tponpymévos 
an r > "\ 
os aAnOds picOapveiv, ovK els AG Kal oUYyyveunv 
axovaas av Tis éxxe, TAUT avarioKe. TadTa 8 éotl 
e > v ‘ an 
Tl; o TWaTnp, ® avdpes SikacTai, 0 ToUTOV TO Snyo- 


Tov Aovyov éyypdwat] ‘to enter 
his account’ of the monies he 
had collected in the public 
books of the Logistae. So Ae- 
schin. Ctes. § 20 éyypadew mpos 
Tous AoytoTas 6 vdmos Kedever NO- 
yov. More commonly éyypd- 
gew is simply ‘to register’ a 
debt or fine, c. Nicostr. p. 1251 
§ 14 éyypdder Te Syuoclw (in 
the treasury), where examples 
are collected in Sandys’ note. 
Timocrates was not afraid to 
make common cause with An- 
drotion, when their colleagues 
(as is implied) had kept aloof 
from their exactions. 

mpoika yap, ovdev wpedovuevos] 
And yet you are asked to be- 
lieve that he incurs your ha- 
tred gratuitously, for no per- 
sonal gain. 

avrod vow rporépy] Above, 
§§ 62, 63. 

_ §§ 200—203. He has taken 
up the trade of a hireling, and 
makes no good use of the money: 
what he has gained basely he 
spends selfishly. He suffers his 
own father to languish under 
Atimia, which he will one day 
inherit himself, rather than pay 


a small sum to restore him to his 
civic rights (201): he is the be- 
trayer of his sister’s honour 
(202). Jf you do not put him to 
death, you will be thought to 
like his pettifogging actions 
and the trouble he gives you, 
and to have no desire to be rid 
of scoundrels (203). 

§ 200. amrorpéyouat] §§1n., 
104n. Here = alone preserves 
the better reading. 

mpoypnuevos| ‘though he has 
made it his set purpose (7poal- 
pects). Generally with accus, 
mpoapetoOai re: for the infin. 
compare c. Dionysodor. p. 1297 
§ 48 wodXol rv xara Oadarrav 
épyaferOat mpoatpoupévwy (where- 
as in § 1 he had said rv épya- 
alav mponpnuévos). Isocr. Phil. 
§ 77 roviras ériBovdevwr, vrép 
wv 6 mpdyovos aviTod mpoelhero 
Kwduvevew, 

ovk els &...tTatr’ dvaricxer] 
There is no probability in Do- 
bree’s conjecture rov7’ avaNicxer. 
The order is eis raira & dxovoas 
Tis cuyyvapny av éoxe, and Kal 
emphasizes cvyyvwunr. 

0 warnp| This favours the 
inference already drawn from 


246 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [$$ 201—203. 


cio odeirer’ Kal ovK ovedifwv éxeive Néyw, GAN 
dvayKatopevos* Kal ovTos 6 ypnoTos Teptopa. Kalrou 
GoTis méAXwY KANPOVOUNTELY THS aTYysias, ay éxelvos 
TL 7dOn, pr) oleras Seivy éxticar, GANA Kepdaivery, Ov 
éxeivos Ch ypovov, dEvol TodTO TO Képbos, Tivos av vuiy 
aroaxécOar Soxet; Kal Tov pev Tratépa ovT’ édecis 763 
odte Sewd cou Soxei macxew, ei cod NapBavoyTos 
Kal ypnpatifouevov amd Tav eichopav wy eicé- 
Tpattes, aT0 Tov’ Wwhdicpatov av ypades, ad’ ov 
ciadhépers vopmov, Sud pixpov apy prov pn peTexer THS 
modews, ETépous © eXejoal Tas Hys; adda v7 Ala 
Thy adehpnv Karés Siudxneev. aArAN eb Kal pndev 


20 


eH 


202 


i ray om. Bens. cum Sv. 


Androt. § 66 compared with Ti- 
mocr, .§ 173, that Timocrates 


lowed by p77, not ov. 
Kepdaive...toiro 7d _Képdos] 


was much younger than Andro- 
tion. 

ovK dverdigwy éxelvm Néyw] It 
was usual to apologise when al- 
luding to the ‘misfortunes’ of 
those who had been convicted, 
other than the immediate ob- 
jects of attack. So in Mid. p. 
533 § 58 ov ydp dverdion pad Tos 
Geods ovdevi Svoxepes ovdev Bovdrd- 
Mevos TOUTO tovjow, When he is 
about to mention the Atimia of 
Sannio (xéxpyrat cvudopa): cf 
Androt. §§ 55 n., 62, above 
§ 132. 

kal ovros 6 xpnords mepiopa] 
‘and yet this worthy person al- 
lows him to remain 60.’ xpn- 
ords ironical, § 160. 

§ 201. KAnpovouncew THs ari- 
plas] Androt. § 34 n. 

dy éxeivés te ma0y] ‘should 
anything happen to his father :’ 
a euphemism as in Latin and 
English. 

uy olerac] The relative doris 
here=ei, and is therefore fol- 


‘to enjoy what it would cost 
him’ (to pay his father’s debt). 

AauBavovros kal xpnuarifope- 
vov] ‘while you help yourself 
and make money:’ the usual 
sense of xpnuatigecOae middle. 
Pro Phorn. p. 593 § 30 amd rod 
XpnuarlfecOar kal érépwv mrelw 
krncacba. So xpnyarirns a 
money-maker, economist, ] Boeot. - 
de Nom. p. 1002 § 25 ris qv xpn- 
pariorys 0 marnp (where ris= 
moids Tis. For xpnuarifew ac- 
tive, §§ 21 n., 45, 55. 

Bia puxpov hevéptov} ‘for,’ i.e 
‘for want of.’ Schaefer com- 
pares Aristoph. Plut. 147 éywyé 
Tot Oud pxpdv apyupldvov | doddos 
yeyévnua dia TO pn TrovTety 
tows: where Dobree had referred 
to the present passage. 

§ 202. adda vy Ala...Kardds 
digxnkevy] Both phrases occur 
Androt. § 69 and above § 176, 
For di«ynxev with acc. of per- 
son, ‘has managed her affairs 
nicely,’ Dindorf compares Isae- 


203 Kepxupa. 


P. 763.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 247 
GdXo Hoikel, KaTAa TOUT aELOs éoT aTroAWAéEVaL’ Té- 
Tpake yap avTnv, ovK éKdédaxe. TAY yap vweTtépav 
éyOpav évi, Kepxupaim twi tév viv éyovtov tip 
TOMY, KATANOVTL Tap aUT@ OTE Sedpo mpeaPevou, 
kat Bovrnbévts AaBeiv avtnv (€F ob Sé Tporov, ma- 
parciiya) ANaBoav apyvpiov Sédwxe* Kal viv éotuv év 
Os ov THY pev aderAdny em’ eEayoyh bn- 
al* wev éxdodvat, wémpaxe SE TO Epyw, Tov Sé adTod 
matépa oUTw ynpotpode?, KoNaKever Sé Kal puicbod 
ypader Kal TrodtTeVeTaL, TOUTOY vpueis AaBdvTES OvK 


> 


amroxteveite ; OofeTe apa, @ avdpes "AOnvaios, xpi- 
aeis BovrcoOar kal mpaypat exew, dAN ovK a7/A- 
NayOar TOY Tovnpar. 


k gnoce Z Bekk. Bens. cum 5. 


us Or. 7 (Apollodor.) § 6 avrov 
& éxetvov ottw dupxnoev ércrpo- 
Tew WOTE TPLOY avTH TAaddvTwY 
dixny dpreiv. 

el kal undev Gddo Hdlka] ‘even 
if he were guilty of nothing else :’ 
the imperf. expresses the abid- 
ing guilt. ‘If he had committed 
no other crime’ would be 7dixn- 
oev. 

Uuerépwv éxOpav évi] Since 
the year 361 the oligarchs had 
had the upper hand at Corcyra, 
and the island had quitted the 
Athenian alliance. They were 
not at war (oAéutor), but poli- 
tically hostile (éx@pot). 

karaNvovtt... mperBevor] ‘who 
used to lodge at his house when- 
ever he came here as ambassa- 
dor.’ The optative ‘of indefi- 
nite frequency’ shows that the 
man came more than once: and 
xaradvovre is therefore an im- 
perf. participle. 

§ 203. én’ éaywy7p...éxdov- 
vat}! The giving in marriage of 
an Athenian woman to a fo- 


reigner was itself illegal, as K. 
points out, referring to Dict. 
Antiq. 8.Vv. ‘Exagoges Diké.’ 
For the corresponding law a- 
gainst the marriage of a citizen 
with a foreign woman, Androt. 
§ 3m. Aristogiton is likewise 
accused of selling his sister 
(perhaps an illegitimate half- 
sister) : Ovyarépa & éxelyns 6 oTwae- 
Snore yevowervny (€a yap ToUTO), 
GAN’ ddeApyv ye, em’ eéaywya 
amédoro 1. Aristog. p. 787 § 55. 

KoNaKever . - Tohireverat] bas 
c8o00 belongs to modtrevera as 
well as to ypdder: ‘is a hanger- 
on (is the ame damnée of such 
people as Androtion, does their 
dirty work) and a hireling de- 
cree-drawer and politician.’ 

amnd\AadxGac] The full mean- 
ing of the perf. infin. is ‘to be 
at once and for ever quit:’ § 60 
n. So ddetcAa in § 207. 

§§ 204—209. The man who 
passes a bad law is worse than a 
thief or common criminal. The 
thief injures only his victims, 


4 


248 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§$ 204-207. 


Kat pv ote péev mpocnkes mavtas Koralew Tovs 
adikoovtas, ed ofS OTe mavtes av, el Tis EporTo, hy- 
cate’ dam dé padLoTa TODTOY, OS VOMoV EioEeVvnVOXEV 
él BradByn Tov wANHOovs, eyo Teipacopar Sidakat. 
TOV wev yap KAeT TOY Kal NwTrOSUTaY Kai TA TOLADTA 
Kakoupyovvt@y exacTos TpaTOV pev ws adnOas TOV 
évtvyovT abdixel, Kal ovK av olds T ein TavTas éx- 
dvew ovdé Ta Travtav vert Oat, cita KaTavoyuveEL 
THY avtov dSofav Kat tov Biov povov. et S€é TUS 
eladéper vopov €£ ob tois buds Bovropévors aduxeiv 
» waca é€ovcia Kal adela yevnoetat, odTos OAV 764 
Gdikel THY TOW Kal KaTaLoYUVEL TaYTAaS* VOMOS 
yap aicxypos dTav KUpLos 7, THs ToAEwWS dvELdOs EoTL 
THs Oewévns, kal Brame. Tavtas boot Tep av avTe 


204 


205 


VPOVTAl. 


and disgraces only himself: but 
the author of a law which gives 
impunity to crime both injures 
and disgraces the whole people 
(205). The first step in a revo- 
lution is usually the opening of 
prisons (206). I am not afraid 
of the defendant’s overthrowing 
your government: but remember, 
he has taken this revolutionary 
step (207). What would your 
feelings be, if you heard a yell 
at this moment which announced 
that the scum of your gaols had 
broken loose, and if Timocrates 
were the author of the mischief 2 
Surely he would be hurried to 
execution without even a hear- 
ing (208). Well, his law not 
merely opens the prisons, but as 
good as pulls them down, and 
the courts of justice with them: 
for it renders both useless (209). 

§ 204. AwrodvTév] See on 
§ 114 ipdreov 4 AnKUOov...€K Toy 
yupvaclww vpédotro, 


a \ / 
Tov ovv kat BranTewv vas Kal dd&ns 


mpurov pev...adixet] ‘in the 
first place he really injures only 
the man who falls in his way,’ 
Tov évTuxovTa Opp. to mdvras. 


‘O évruvxayv is ‘the first comer,’ 


Isae. Or. 3 (Pyrrhus) § 61, Or. 
9 (Astyph.) § 12. 
éxdvew| A word appropriate 
enough to Awmrodvrar; but here 
perhaps opp. to vdehécOa of 
stripping with violence, as in 
Conon. p. 1259 § 8 éuol mepie- 

covres TO pev mpwrov éédvcay. 

§ 205. 7 mwaica ééovola kal 
ddeva] ‘complete license and 
impunity.’ éfovola is rare of 
unlawful authority; but com- 
pare Aeschin. Timarch. § 108 
TOUTOV aUuTOV AaBovra ddevav Kai 
é£ouclay kal apxnv ris dy édrloecev 
dmroXedourévar TL TW acehyerra- 
Twv épywv; For dade in this 
sense, Androt. § 25, above § 102. 
—xkvptos 7 ‘is in force.’ 

avT@ xpwvra] ‘live under it.’ 
§§ 139, 140 and elsewhere. 


P. 764] 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 


249 


> a) lel > 
AVATILT NAVAL PAVANS ETLYELPOUVTA, TOUTOY OV TLLwW- 


206 pynoeabe AaBovtTes ; Kal Ti PnoeTEe; yvoin & av Tis 


ovTw pdric@ nrika Tpayyata cvcKevacas yéypa- 
dev avtov, Kal tad@ ws vrevavtia TH Kabeotoon 
ToniTela, eb Noyicatto bTL TayTEs, Tay Tov KaTa- 
Moves TOv SHwov mpdypaci eyxYeipdot vewTépots, 
TOUTO TOLOUGL TpOToV aTravTwV, Ekvcayv Tos TpOTE- 
pov vow Sv apaptiay twa tavtnv vrTréxyovTas THY 


64 a a > bf e > Py \ \ > 
207 Oixnv. TOS ovV OUK A&Los OVTOS, EL SuVaTOY, Tpis, OVX 


\ x 
dmaé drodwrévat, Os els Mv Kal ov Syirov péAXOV 


U ¢€ a“ > \ ’ / ’ ‘ > ¢ A » 
KaTaNVELY Vas, AANA. TOVVAVTLOV AUTOS Ev UELLV, av 


\ / \ \ / a > s 
Ta Oikata Kal Ta TpocnKoVTAa ToinTe, aTroréaOaz, 


doEns dvariumwrdva pavdns] 
‘cover you with infamy.’ Cf. 
Lept. p. 466 § 28 rs 5é ¥y’ ai- 
oxuvns SdAnv dvariumdnot THY 1d- 
uv, quoted by R. W. 

§ 206. Alka mpdyuara ov- 
oxevacas] ‘with what deep de- 
signs he framed this law.’ ov- 
oxevafew is properly ‘to pack 
up,’ Lat. convasare; the literal 
sense occurs Plat. Theaet. 175 5 
oTpwpardderpmov un emicramevos 
ovoxevdcacba. In the Orators 
the use of the verb is metaphor- 
ical, and found in all three 
voices: active here and Fals. 
Leg. p. 358 § 54=61 dmavra 
ravra els év Wndiowa Kareckeva- 
cay: passive, ib. p. 365 § 76= 
86 4 waca dmrarn Kal réxvn our- 
ecxevac9n Tov mepl PwKeas dré- 
@pov: middle, ib. p. 488 § 303 = 
346 0 cvoKevdfecOar Thy ‘EXAdda 
kal IleXordévvyncor Pidtrmov Bowr, 
‘forming them into a combi- 
nation against you,’ and Plato 
a 

étav mov] ‘wherever.’ G.H. 
Schaefer observes that zrov=ali- 
cubi, i.e. in any democratic go- 
vernment; éray mov will there- 
fore =sicubi. 


mpadypuacw éyxecpGor vewrépors | 
Exactly = rebus novis studere, 
‘to aim at a revolution :’ in this 
sense vewrepdy ti mparrew is 
common, as well as vewrepifer, 
but éyxepeiv does not seem to 
occur elsewhere. 

é\veav] This aorist, follow- 
ing the presents éyxecpdor and 
motovat, is rightly rendered as a 
present by K. Thus used it 
expresses what is wont to hap- 
pen, Jelf, Synt. § 402. 1; Mad- 
vig, Synt. § 111 a. Benseler 
less correctly turns all the verbs 
into the past tense. 

Tavtnv wréxovras Thy dikny] 
‘those who are undergoing this 
punishment :’ as in dodvac dixny. 

§ 207. pwé\X\wv karadvew...d7- 
o\éoOa] The reading of the 
best secondary MSS. xaradicew 
and dmoXcicGac ought certainly 
to be followed here. Cobet, 
who sometimes repeats himself, 
notices this point twice over, 
Nov. Lect. p. 780 and Mise, 
Crit. p. 558: adding that it 
ought to have been restored in- 
vitis libris. Without dogma- 
tising with Phrynichus and Co- 
bet on this point, it may be 


208 


209 


250 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 208-210. 


vA b] , an 1OL, \ 8 \ a f 
OMWS EULULNTATO TOUTO Tadiknua, Kal OLa TOV VOpoU 
c\ / \ / / 
Avew néiwocev ods Sédexe TA SiKaoTHpLa, yparras 
lal rn x \ , 
avato@s, el TLve TpocTeTipnTar Serpod Kav TO AovTTOV 
na b] n \ \ >] 
TWte Tpootiunonte, TodTov agelcar. Kal pny et! 
, \ a 4 
avtixa 8) para Kpavyny axovoatte mpds TO SiKka+ 
t vA / e 
oTnplo, iT eltroe TIS WS avéwKTAL TO SeTpPwWTNPLOY, Ob 
\ n , >] \ v , $f. '3> 4 / 
5é Seaopdtat hevyovaw, ovdels ote yépwv ovT’ OrI- 
lef m ¢/ > \ / x i ¢/ 
yepos ovTws™ baTis ovxt BonOncevey av Kad ocov 
, > \ / by4 \ ¢ ¢ / 
duvatar. ef dé 84 Tis eros TapEeAO@Y ws O TOUTOUS 
> ‘in b] ¢ \ > % / \ Ov x 
ageis™ €otiv ovTocl, ovdé Adyou Tuy@y evOs av 


> \ / / lal / ” > 
aTtraxGeis Oavatm Enuiwbein. viv Toivuy éxeTe, @ 


l ef ris et mox axovoa Bens. cum Fv. 
m add ésriv Z Bekk. om. D>AQkrs Bens, 
» aguels Z Bekk, Illud = et Longin. 


remarked that in prose at least 
there is always a strong pre- 
sumption in favour of the future 
after ué\Aw. In verse a greater 
latitude was naturally allowed: 
yet Mr Rutherford’s careful ex- 
amination shows that the ex- 
ceptions amount to no more 
than four per cent. of the whole 
in Comedy, and somewhat more 
in Tragedy (New Phryn. p. 420 
ff.). Lobeck, who devotes an 
appendix to the constructions of 
pé\\w, argues in favour of ad- 
mitting the pres. and aor. in 
prose as well (Phryn. p. 745 ff.). 

kav...mpootiunonte|] We have 
here the strict grammatical con- 
struction instead of #...mpoori- 
benOy as in §§ 39, 72, 79, 93. 
An explanation of the apparent 
solecism has been suggested in 
the note on § 39: Cobet wishes 
to alter all the rest into con- 
formity with the present pas- 
sage, reading everywhere xdv 
(Mise. Crit. p. 549). 

§ 208. This appeal to the 
imagination of his hearers has- 


been much admired by critics 
ancient and modern, beginning 
with the author of the treatise 
mept vipous, c. 15 §9 (ed. Weiske). 
Kennedy has quoted his re- 
marks trom a French transla- 
tion: it may be as well to give 
the words of the original. Ti 
otv H pnropixh pavracia dvvarat; 
TloAAG pév tows Kal dda Tots b- 
yous évaywua Kal éuralh mpoc- 
ecopéper’ KaTakipvayévyn pmévTot 
Tais mpayyarikais émuxerpnoecw, 
ov weiGer Tov akpoarhv pbvoy, GANG 
kal SovAodra. The writer then 
quotes the entire section, pro- 
bably from memory as there are 
a few verbal differences. 

avrika 67 para] Androt. § 
65 n. 

éNiywpos] ‘indifferent.’ The 
pseudo-Longinus gives these 
words as ovdels ol’ rws, obre yépwv 
ore véos, ddlywpds éorw: ‘the 
condensed expression of the 
text is much more forcible. 

§ 209. éxere] ‘you have him 
in your power.’ 


210 


P. 765.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS 251 


a a a ea | , iy 
avopes "A@nvaiot, TovTov, os ovxt rape memroinue 
etl Gra hevakicas Kal Trapaxpovad wevos vas? 


vapor Té0exe? havepas, Os ovK avolyvuct TO Cer ee: 765 


TipLov, GAA Kabatpet, Tpoarrepieiinde Sé Kal Ta 
Sixactipia. tis yap ) TovTwY 7) éxeivov ypela, bTaV 
an x \ / 
ols tetiwntat Secpod AVwYTAaL, KaV TO OLTrOV TLEN- 
onté Tw, wndev Viv 7 Téor ; 
Aci toivuv tas KaKxeivo cKoTrety, OTL TOAXOL TOV 
, ft / 
‘EAAnvov ToANaKIS ciow eyndicpévolt Tots vopots 
fal al ¢ / >43 e ral ¢ al 
xpicbar tois vpuerépos, €f @ irotipetcOe vpeis, 
2S en \ > a U > ¢.® tx Ae 
elkOT@s' 0 yap eitreiy Tiva hacw ev vpiv, adrnles 
ed / a ¢ \ ’ cA e / 
elval wot Sokel, OTL TOS VOoMous A7ravTes UITrEetAnha- 
a a , \ 
ow, bc0t Gwppovodcl, TpdTOUS THS TOAEwS. XP? 
, 5 
tolvuv otrovoate ows ws? BérXtTLcTOL So€ovat eivat, 
/ > \ 
Kal Tovs Avpatvopévouvs Kal SiactpéhovTas avTOUS 
Na IS eb Oupn As hirotiutas Te" 
Konakew, ws eb KaTappabupncete, THs PiroTLmias T 


° Juas om. Z. 
4 w&s om. Bens. cum =F v. 


gevaxioas Kal mapaxpovodpe- 
vos] §194n. 

mpoomepielAnge] §§ 44 n., 83. 
—rhéov, § 130 n. 

§§ 210, 211. You justly pride 
yourselves on the fact that many 
Greek states have adopted your 
laws: and in the laws sensible 
people look for the character of 
a state. You must take care not 
to lose by remissness the distinc- 
tion you now enjoy. You honour 
the authors of good legislation, 
like Draco and Solon, even if 
there is no other public service 
that you can attribute to them: 
a reason for punishing this man, 
who legislates to abolish the 
penalty that he is conscious of 
having deserved. 

§ 210. & vuiv] ‘a saying in 
this court that I have heard of,’ 
K.: but vuiy may be simply, as 


P ZOnxe Z cum =. 
r om. Z Bekk. Bens. cum 2. 


it often is, the Athenian people 
(§ 211 n.). 

Tovs Aumawouévous Kal Siacrpé- 
govras| ‘those who corrupt and 
impair them.’ 

Karappaduuncere] Rightly 
given in L. and 8. as an active 
verb, ‘lose or miss from care- 
lessness:’ not simply ‘be weak 
or careless’ (jJqa@uuelv). Cf. 1. 
Phil. p. 42 § 7 ra Kareppaduun- 
péva wadw AnPYecOe. Xen. Hell. 
vi. 2 § 39 pwyre Karappaduuay 
pyre karaueddv palvecOa under, 
‘spoiling nothing either by su- 
pineness or carelessness;’ an 
interesting passage on the mi- 
litary character of Iphicrates. 
This sense of xara in compounds 
is discussed by Cobet, Nov. 
Lect. p. 574 f. 

giroruuias] Androt. § 73 n. 


211 


212 


252 KATA TIMOKPATOTS., [§§ 211-213. 
¢ 

Uy b] , \ \ al , ’ 
TauvTNS aTrootepnaecbe Kal Kata THS Torews SoEav 
b) ..! , \ \ > / \ / 
ov YpnoTHY TroinoeTe. Kal py et LOAwva Kal Apd- 
kovTa Sikaiws ératwweire, ovK av éxovTes eitreiy ovde- 

/ \ > / ’ OQ \ \ 7 / 

Tépov Kowwov evepyéTnu ovUdéV TAY OTL TUphépovTas 
éOnxav Kal Karas Eyovtas vomous, Sixatov Sy7rov Kal 
Tois vmevavtins TiWciow éxeivors dpyiias EéyovTas 
Kal Koravovtas haiverOar. oida dé TioKxparny, drt 
TOV VOMOV ElcEeVnVOXE TOUTOV OVX HKIGO UIrép avTOD' 

\ \ c a / ? ? v7 
TOAXKa yap nyeito TodTeverOar Trap vpiv akia 


deo 00. 


BovrAouat tolvuv vpiv Kaxeivo Sinynoacba, 6 


’ a a 
gaci tor eiteiy Yorwva KaTHyopobvTa vomov TLVOS 


§ 211. ovbx dv éxovres] ‘ Sub- 
audi etiamsi. velitis s. siquis 
vos interroget.’ G. H. Schaefer. 
This would in Greek be «i Bov- 
AowwBe or ef Tis porto: the par- 
ticiple with dy if replaced by 
a finite verb would be ovx ay 
éxorre. Madvig, Synt. § 184. 

Umevayriws...éxelvos] ‘in the 
contrary spirit to theirs,’ i.e. to 
Draco and Solon, not éxeivos 
rots vouos. The two ancient 
legislators are mentioned in 
order of dignity, not of time. 
The reading of >, redeiow, is 
one of that copyist’s ingenious 
blunders which ought to protect 
us from delusions concerning 
him: as if the Athenians were 
not merely to be angry with, 
but to punish, the laws them- 
selves and not the authors of 
them! 

Worrd ydp...decuod] ‘for he 
thought that many of his poli- 
tical acts among you deserved 
imprisonment.’ These speeches 
abound in expressions like rap’ 
ipiv, év vuiv, appealing to the 
consciousness of a free people, 
by which the immediate hearers 


are reminded that they repre- 
sent their countrymen as a 
body (above, §§ 11, 16, 25, 37, 
89, 117). So at Rome. How 
much the grand epitaph of Sci- 
pio Barbatus gains in impres- 
siveness by a similar touch: 
‘Consol Censor Aidilis quei 
fuit apud vos.’ (Imitated in the 
inscription written by Baron 
Bunsen for Dr Arnold’s monu- 
ment at Rugby, ‘Christum prae- 
dicavit apud vos’). 

§§ 212—214. Apropos of So- 
lon, I will tell you of a saying at- 
tributed to him. He once asked 
a jury if they thought it right 
to punish a man with death for 
debasing the coin: when they 
assented, he argued that cor- 
rupting the law, the coinage of 
the state, was a worse crime than 
debasing money invented for the 
private dealings of ordinary ci- 
tezens (213). He added that 
many states had debased their 
coin and been none the worse for 
it, but no people who suffered 
their laws to be corrupted had 
long escaped national decay 


213 


P. 766.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 253 
’ > / , / \ al a 
ovK émiTndecov Oévtos. RéyeTat yap Tois Sixactais 
auTov eimrety, émevd) TAXA KaTHYOPHGEY, bTL VOMOS 
€oTly amadoais ws éros eitrely Tais ToXECLY, Ea TIS 
\ t Py @ / 0 , \ / 5 
TO voutopa SiapGeipn, Oavatov tiv Enuiav eivar. 
érrepwtnaas O€ eb Oikalos avTois Kal Karas éywr O 
vomos paivetat, émerdn pnoat Tovs Sixactas, eizeiv 
7 ] a / , ro 
OTL AUTOS HYyElTaL apyUpLov meV Vomliom eElvar Tov 
? / / iA an > / ¢ / 
idimy cuvadrAaypaTov Eveka TOIs LOLdTaLS EvpNmévor, 
Tovs € vomous nyoiTo® vowicpa THS ToOAEwWS EivaL. 
Seiv 5) Todvs Sikactds TOAAD paddXor, él Tis O Tis 


8 yyeira Bens. ayetro Dkrsv. 


§ 212. dmdoas...tais rédeow] 
This was true until recently of 
modern civilised states: and 
sometimes with aggravations of 
the death penalty unknown to 
the sensitive Athenians. In 
England coining was not ‘fe- 
lony’ but ‘petty treason:’ the 
difference this made was. that 
men were drawn on a hurdle to 
the gallows, women were burnt 
at the stake. In France also, 
before the Revolution, it is 
stated that burning was the 
punishment of coiners. 

érepwrncas] After déyerac 
avrov elev we should expect 
érepwrncavra, but the construc- 
tion passes for a moment from 
the oblique to the direct, to re- 
turn immediately to the former 
in érecin pfoat...elmety. 

éreon 6¢ pica] For érel, 
érre.o7) With infin, in oratio ob- 
liqua, Madvig, Synt. § 163: on 
relatives in general with infin, 
ib. § 169. The form of the Pla- 
tonic dialogues, in which con- 
versations are so often reported 
by one of the interlocutors, na- 
turally lends itself to long-con- 
tinued oblique construction: 
among these the Symposium 


affords, perhaps, the most strik- 
ing examples, 

§ 213. cuvaddayudrwr] For 
the distinction between cuyupéd- 
Aaov guvdd\Nayua and cuvOyKn 
see Kennedy in Dict. Antiq. s.v. 
‘Symbolaeon:’ cf. note on cur- 
adddrrew § 192. 

Trois liudsras evpnuevov] Sup- 
posing this anecdote to be genu- 
ine, we have here an illustra- 
tion of the low estimate of 
commerce in Greek life. But 
on this it may be observed that 
in the great days of Athens the 
commercial spirit became much 
more developed: and that So- 
lon, who had himself depreci- 
ated the coinage in the interest 
of debtors, was not a good judge 
of the importance of ‘ hard mo- 
ney.’ We know, however, that 


766, 


his remedial legislation did not ~ 


fail of its object. The ypedv 
amoxoral (§ 149 n.) were heard 
of no more at Athens, the money 
standard was never again de- 
preciated, and the general feel- 
ing was one of high respect for 
the sanctity of contracts. Com- 
pare Grote, ch. xi, (11. 310, ed. 
1862), 


ew n > lal > / 
214 0 T@Y LowwToY éoTlV. 


254 


KATA TIMOKPATOTS., [8§ 214-216. 


U Ul > a / \ U 
TOAEWS ETTL VOmLCpa, TOTO SiadOelper Kai Tapacn- 
pov eiadéper, puceiv Kal Kodrafew, el Tis éxeivo 


mpocOeiva Sé TeKunptov Tov 


a / 
Kal pettov etvas TAadiKNM“a TO TOS Vomous SiadOel perv 
DY \ > / e/ 3 / \ \ n , 

) TO apyuplov, OTL apyupiwm ev TOAXNAaL THY TOAEWY 
\ A \ \ \ , / 
kal pavep@s mpos yadKov Kal porvBdov Kexpayevo 

> n an 
ypemevar cwfovtar Kal ovd oTwiv Tapa TobTO Ta- 


U \ a f \ / 
cyxovat, vouors Sé Tovnpots ypwmevor Kal SiapGel- 
pecat Tods dvtas éwvTes ovdéves TUTOT écwOnaar. 


TavTn mévtoL TH KaTHYyopla TipoKpatns Evoxos Kabé- 


ee eee a a 
oTNKE vuvl, Kal Sixaiws av Vp Vay TOD TPoTHKOVTOS 


TUYOL THN MATOS. 


§ 214. gavepas... kexpauévy] 
The Greeks did not, like many 
French kings and some English, 
secretly alloy their silver coin 
with base metal, and so render 
it unavailable for foreign trade 
while giving it a forced currency 
at home. One hundred Solo- 
nian drachmas contained no 
more silver than 73 of the old: 
but the change was effected by 
reducing the size of the coin, 
not the purity of the metal. 
The Athenian money was ever 
after the best in Greece, and 
much in request throughout the 
Hellenic world (Xen. de Vect. 
3 § 2. The IIdpu, a work of 
Xenophon’s old age, is not far 
removed in date from the An- 
drotionea of Demosthenes. We 
are apt to forget the overlapping 
of these two distinguished c¢a- 
reers). 

xXpwoueva. cHfovra] K. trans- 
lates ‘by openly using...saved 
themselves from ruin.’ I do 
not think the bad money and 
the escape from ruin stand to 
one another in the relation of 
cause and effect; and prefer to 


render, ‘though they use...get 
safe out of it:’ cdfec@a is opp. 
to dwéAd\voOa, and so nearly 
= 008 éruovy macxovc., 

ovdéves rumor éowbnoay] ‘no 
state had escaped decline.’ The 
plural ovdéves appears to be al- 
ways used, in prose, of aggre- 
gates or bodies of men, never 
of a plurality of individuals. 
See a good note of Shilleto’s on 
Fals. Leg. p. 362 § 66=74 ro- 
avra memovOoras ola ovdéves GAOL 
tav ‘EAjvwv (which he trans- 
lates ‘no other nation’). ib. p. 
850 § 381—35 ovdévas mpéc Bes. 
1. Aphob. p. 815 § 7 ray mumror 
ériTpoTrevoavTwv ovdéves (‘no sets 
of ambassadors, guardians’). 
A somewhat doubtful instance 
to the contrary is in Hyperid. 
Epitaph. col. 13, 22 ovdévas o- 
Tws olxetous ovdé misTorépous vutv 
of Harmodius and Aristogiton. 
In poetry the meaning is less 
restricted: Eur. Androm. 700 
bvres ovdéves =‘ being nobodies.’ 

§$ 215—217. All authors of 
bad legislation ought to be pun- 
ished, and that in proportion to 
the importance of the laws they 


215 


P. 766.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 255 


A ’ f- 
Xp) pev ody wacw dpyirws exe, Boor TiOéact 
vopmous aiaxpovs Kal Tovnpods, wadrtota 5é TovToLS oF 


. tal / 
Tovs TovovTous TOV vopwv SiadGelpovar, dv wv éotiw 


216 


\ \ 
) psKpav 1) peyannv eivar Tv wodwW. eiol & ovToL 
> lal 
tives; of Te TOS adiKOdVYTAS TiwpoUpmeEvoL Kal boot 
rd \ / 
Tots értekéeor Tyas Twas’ diddacw. Eb yap arraVvTes 
mpoOupnOetery troety ayabov Te TO KoWdVv, Tas TLWas 
\ \ \ \ ¢, \ / / . \ 
Kat tas Swpeds Tas Umép TovTwayv $nrdcavTes, Kal 
TavrTes aTooTtaiey Tov KaKoupyeiv [7 KaKOV TL TPAaT- 
Vv \ / \ \ / \ p eee / 
rew |", tas BraBas Kal tas Enpias tas éri TovTOLs 
kermevas phoBnbévtes, oP & TL KwAVEL THY TOdLD 


t twas om. Z Bekk. cum libris praeter Fy. v. not. 
Y sine uncis Z Bens, 


corrupt. The most important Cf. Lept. p. 500 § 14 rodr’ écrit 


laws are those which punish 
wrong-doers and confer certain 
distinctions on the well-conduct- 
ed. If all Athenians ‘lived up 
to’ our existing laws, what would 
not Athens be, with her vast ma- 
terial resources (216)? If on the 
other hand we suffered the laws 
to become as bad as Timocrates 
would make them, twice those re- 
sources would be useless for any 
great purpose. 

§ 215. 8 dv éorw] * upon 
which it depends whether’ &c. 

Tots émeckéat.. dda] The 
reading of 2 riuds rivds is right- 
ly accepted by Dindorf and Ben- 
seler. That the laws ought to 
reward virtue is a platitude, and 
at the same time a very doubt- 
ful proposition: that they ought 
‘to confer certain distinctions 
on the law-abiding’ is more de- 
finite and less open to dispute. 
—émieixns nearly =pérpios, An- 
drot. § 25 n. 

§ 216. gndrdoavres] ‘through 
striving zealously after;’ or as 
K. ‘from an ambition to win,’ 


TO émirndeuua (nrovvTwv dperny. 
ib. p. 504 § 154 ras éml rails 
evepyeclais Swpeds <ndwoarres. 
The latter passage, occurring in 
the peroration of the Leptinea, 
bears a close resemblance to this 
and the preceding section. 

n Kaxbv te mpartew] Reiske 
was the first to bracket these 
words, and has been followed 
by nearly all editors. Benseler 
alone justifies the tautology on 
the ground that caxoupyety bears 
a technical meaning, ‘to commit 
a felony’ (such as murder and 
the more serious cases of rob- 
bery, which were capitally pun- 
ished, Androt. § 26 n.), while 
kakov Te mparrewy (=éfamapraverv 
Androt. § 41) is applied to slight- 
er offences. But out of a mul- 
titude of references he has not 
produced a single instance of 
Kakov Te mparrew for movety or 
(more commonly) épyafeca:. 
The parallel passage just noted 
(Lept. § 154) has xaxdv re roe 
without xaxouvpyety, whence the 
text has probably been patched. 


217 


256 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [§§ 217, 218. 
b) / e 

peyloTny eivat; ov Tpinpers Boas ovdemia TONS “EX- 

Anvis KEKTHTAL; OY OTAITasS; OvY im7Tréas ; OV TpoC- 
LS : ) , x, > , : a Say , 

o00US; OU TOTTOUS’; OV ALMEVAaS; TaUTa OE” TraVTa 

\ 

ti awler Kal ouvéyer; of vopor’ KaTa yap TovTOUS 

ovons THS ToNrtTElas EoTL TADTA YpHoLULA TO KOLO, 
a a ¢e 

et 6¢ tovvavtiov yévotto Tois ypnoTois pwév pnd OTI- 

obv TAéov, Tois © abdixodow adeca bonv TimoKparns 

yéypade, oon Tapayn yévoiT av eixoTws; Ev yap 

ic@ bre TovTov wv SieEHAOOY KTNUAaTwY, OVS Et Sis 

/ ] 7 lal ? 3709 ¢ lal x v ” 
yévol? boa vov éativ, ovd OTLoby av ddeEdos Ein. 
otTos Tolvuy év TOUT@ TO vouw haiveTas KAKGS ETTL- 


x rorov Z Bens. cum >. 


Tomous] ‘posts’ in the mili- 
tary sense: for which, however, 
the usual word is xwpla. 2 
alone reads tdémov, which Ben- 
seler adopts, explaining it of ‘a 
commanding position.’ There 
is a close parallel in tv. Phil. 
p. 135 § 10 rev 8 ’A@nvalwy du- 
pévuv ... Kal TocovTwy mpocddwy 
kal rorrov Kal doéys. That speech 
is now universally admitted to 
be a fabrication: but among 
the genuine works we find 1. 
Phil. p. 48 § 31 rov romrov trys 
xXWpas mpds Hv modeueire: Fals. 
Leg. p. 367 § 84=95 riv amd 
Too ToTou Kal TOY TpayuaTwr 
alta vmdpxovcay dodddeav TH 
move, Another passage referred 
to by Benseler, F. L. p. 413 
§ 230=255 ddov Torov kal meiv 
4 puplovs émXlras...dmws alxua- 
Awro yévwvra Pillawry cvpta- 
pecxevacey seems to me to cut 
the other way and help to jus- 
tify the use of ré7ros as= xwpior, 
‘a fortified place.’ On the 
whole however I incline to think 
that = has preserved the true 
reading. 

ratdra dé] In an interroga- 


Y $6) Bens. cum =. 


tive sentence this is preferable 
to raira dyn (see various read- 


ings). 
§ 217. ddeva oonv Tipoxparns 
yéypape] ‘as complete impu- 


nity as T. has provided’ by his 
law. 

e3 yap ic@’ ori] K. takes tore 
as imperative, Benseler as in- 
dicative. I shine the former is 
right. 

év tovTw T@ vouw] These 
words, unless the text is cor- 
rupt, must be explained as by 
Kennedy and Benseler, ‘in that 
department of law which pro- 
vides for the punishment of cri- 
minals,’ ‘grade in dem Punkte 
zu schwichen, wonach es Stra- 
fen giebt.’ They would natu- 
rally refer, however, to the law 
of Timocrates: and the older 
scholars have proposed various 
bold emendations to make them 
do so: ovx« eiciv Lambinus, d- 
kupo eloly Jurinus, dpoddo: eiclv 
Reiske. The very slight cor- 
rection of Sauppe, év rovrw rav 


767 


vouwr, justifies the rendering © 


given above, and is in other 
respects highly probable. N 


P. 767.] 


KATA TIMOKPATOYS. O57. 


xelpav vuas Toveiv, 54’ ov Tots adiKeiv erriyerpodow 


< 
eloly al Tim@piar. 


f = v4 a“ > / 7 ° A 
llavtwy ovv évexa TeV eipnuevav a&tov opyicOn- 


val Kai KoNacat Kai Tapadeiypa Tonal TODTOY” Tois 


addro1s’ WS TO Tpaws Exe Tois TOLOVT0LS, Kal KaTA- 

anpifer@ar perv, ohiryou b€ Tidy, €Oifew Kal mpod«- 
, al ¢ “a ¢ 

OacKEe oT AdLKElY Vas ws TAEloTOUS. 


2 rovrov om. Z Bens. cum dks. 


expressed by a line above the 
preceding vowel has often dropt 
out: cf. Cobet, Nov. Lect. p. 
530 f. 

paivera...... émixerpav] ‘it is 
shewn that the defendant is at- 
tempting’ K. ‘Offenbar un- 
ternimmt es dieser Mensch’ 
Benseler. Cf. Androt. § 21 n. 

§ 218. Final appeal to the 
jury, not merely to convict but 


W. Dz. 


to award exemplary punish- 
ment, 

Tapaoeryua TovjoarTovTov |] See 
various readings. It is as easy 
to supply from the context an 
accus. after rovnoa as a dative 
after édpy:cOnvac: and Benseler 
may be right in omitting rov- 
Tov. 

éAtyou 6é Tiwav] Like decuov 
Tiwav § 39 and elsewhere. 


17 


GREEK INDEX. 


The figures refer to the Sections. 


A. aruxetv, aruxla, A. 55 
dBiwros, T. 141 avrixa 6 wada, A. 65 
dyopa, A. i 103 B. 
j vouos, ‘I’. 112 . 
thay a 49, 1. 46 pave sprig — A. 27 
dddraros, 'T. 186 BovrAeurenol vouor, ‘L’. 
alcxpoxépdera or -ia, T. 195 sat 
airtay éxew, altidoda, T. 187 yvispynos, A. 13 
dc dKns, T. 129 ar enliites, T. 63 
dioxopat, A. 53, T..77 ypapew, ypaderOau, A. 26 ff. 
adda vn Aia, A. 69 ypapy, A. 26 
dupopic Kos, A. 76— yuuvaova, T. 114 
avaykaios, cvyyerys, T. 67 
avaypagpew, I’. 5, 23, 42 A. 
avdéucos, T. 191 Sewvds, A. 25 
avabnua, of a temple, A. 76 » elmetv, A, 31 
dvauipynokew Tiva TL, T. 12 dexarn, T. 120 
avanrnoay, A. 10, T. 13 dé (bind) contracted, A. 68 
dverxouny, jvecxounv, A. 68 dnuevew, A. 53 
avOpwros, 7}, A. 56 Snucctos, A. 70 
avtvypagets, A. 38 dca and é&€ confused, A. 8 
dvriiiacToNy (late Greek) A. Arg. ded pexpdv apyvprov, T. 201 
amaywyn, A. 26 dc’ éavrod éxew, A, 38. | 
amadvdatrew, T. 37 diadixacia, T. 13 
aravrav éri rr, T. 193 diadvors, T. 139 
ameipdxados, A. 75 Svaurnrys, A. 27 f. 
amdws, A. 20 dcaxpovecOa, T. 132 
do, parox., T. 6 diadvots, T. 139 
dmoyiyvwoxew, A. 39 dueyyvnos, T. 73 
amoypapev, amroypapy, A, 53 dredetv, duehéoOa, T. 19 
amodextat, T. 161 dixaca, trovety Ta, T. 52 
amodéxecOa, A, 19 duxacrhs kara Snuous, T. 112 
amodoylcacGa, 'T. 108 ' Olxn, A. 26 
amohverv, T. 13 diorxety, Soiknors, T, 27, £8, 99 
amorpémecbat, T. 1, 104, 200 SioplgerOar, T. 192 
amoxetporovery, T. 12 
dmrpoBovrevror, A. 5 E. 
dppnra, ambppnra, A. 61 éddwxa, jrwKa, T. 77 
apxatos, mahaids, A. 14 éyypapew, T. 199 
cpxew for dpxecOa, T, 42 éyypados, T. Arg. 
acéBeva, A. 27 éyyvay, éyyvacba, A. 53 
daoedyns, A. 52 &fmv for éfwv, T. 7 
ootpareca, T. 103 © €0ds, A. 37 
actuvouo, T. 112 el with dv, T, 154 


acxnuovety, A. 53 —with ov, A. 18, 24, T. 53 


INDEX, 259 


ef with subj., T. 39 

—=o6r, T. 32 

eixéra, A. 22 f. 

etna, T. 49 

elcayyenlav, T. 63 

elodyew, eloaywy7, eloayurytmos, 
T. 10 


elompatis, elamparrew, A. 44 

eis ToUTO With gen., A. 16 

elcpopa remodelled, A. 44, 48: 
classes of, A. 61 

éxdvew, T. 204 

éxet=TorTe, A. 38 

éxdetva, T. 18, 23, 36 

éxxémrrew, T. 140 

éxdéyorres, éxNoveis, A. 48, T. 40 

éextimrew, A. 1 

@\eov movetcOar, T. 111 

éuwavrov teldw, T. 6 

éuBadrrev, intrude, T. 103 

év interchanged with émi, A. 69 

évarn mpuravela, T. 15, 39, 40 

évoecxvivar, A. 33 

évierécs, A. 26 

évdexa, ol, A. 49 

évexa, T. 65 

évexupate, A. 56 

évoxos, A. 69 

éé and dia confused, A. 8 

éfaywyn, T. 203 

éfeyyinots, T. 73 

éferavecOa, A. 66, T. 6, 173 

éfovola ‘license,’ T. 205 

édpaxa, éwpaxa, A, 14 

érairia, T. 105 

ére:ra without dé after xpwrov 
pév, A. 17. 

émi ‘after,’ A. 17 

émvypdwat, T. 42 

émvecxys, A. 40 

émrmednrns, A. 63 

émioxevagew, A. 69 

émiorarns, A. 9 

émutiusov, T. 115 

ércxecporovia, T. 20 

épyodaBetv, A. 49 

épxoua, Attic forms in use, 
T. 10 

éorw ad, A. 10 

éralonows, A. 21 

evndera, A, 78, T. 52 

eOuva, T. 54 


épeois, T. 54 
epyynas, A. 26 


Z. 
fos, A: 73 
cnryral, T. 11 


nOas, A. 37 

nrudgecOa, T. 50 
ntacriKos dpxos, T. 149 
rlkos, T. 122 


Q. 
barepa=kaxd, A. 12 
GeowwexOpia, A. 59 
Onpiov, 'T. 143 


I. 
léumrnys, A. 25, 37 
iepounvia, T. 29 
icpouvnuwy, T. 150 
ixernpla, T. 12 
iva c. indic., A. 21, 28, T. 48 


K. 

cal and 6é with verb between, 

A. 33 
Kaxorexviay Sixn, T. 54 
Kadds kaya0ds, A. 32 
kara, ‘applying to,’ T. 59 
xara pleonastic, T. 32 

— in compounds, TT’. 210 
karadvec Oar, A. 74 
katapuéuperbar, A. 27 
Kkaranpaduuety, T. 210 
KataocKkevavew, A. 2 
karéxew, A, 49 
kypvé, T. 150 
kAyew, Krelew, A. 18 
codafev, futures of, A, 39 
KoAakevewv, T. 203 
Kod\durds, KoAdurrés, T. 134 
Kpivew = kataxpivew, T. 134 
Kpova, T. 26 
kvapeverGar, T. 150 


A, 
eye adjOecav, A. 6 
Aurostpariou ypagn, T. 103 
ANurorakélou ypaPpy, ‘I’, 103 
Aoyorrotds, T. 15 
Awrodirns, T. 204 


260 INDEX. 


M. 
ped nuepay, T. 113 
wéd\Xw, constructions of, T, 207 
pera, of a condition, T. 76 
pérpios, A. 25 
ben th ye, A. 45 
Muppivois, Muppivotrra, T. 71 


N. 


Nixn, T. 121 
vouobéra, T. 21 
vouwos, T. 27, 33, 157 


al 
Fae 


tevia, T. 181 f. 


0. 


olknua, T. 131 

oiosmep, attracted, A. 64, 77, 
T. 185. 

6dvyooTos, T. 196 

odiyou det, T. 195 

ouwpmoua, A. 4 

"Oma Od6ou0s, T. 136 

bpoBos, A. 15 

ovos, A. 16 

doo wnves, T. 141 

ov after ef, A, 18, 24, T. 53 

ob nv ddda, A. 37 

ov’ dv ei, A. 45 

ovdéves, T. 214 

ovx éav, A. 8 

dpeirev, dpdetv, A. 34, T. 50 


Il. 


mabew 7 atorica, T. 63 

madawos, apxatos, A. 14 

mapa expressing proportion, A. 
44 


map éavrov, ‘out of his own 
pocket,’ A. 45, 48 

Tapa utKpov, wap’ od\lyas Yhous, 
of a narrow majority, A. 3, 
T. 138 

mapaBabnvat, mapaBeBacba, A. 
Arg. 

mapapsvorov, T. 47 

maparyew, A. 4 

twapaypapew, mapaypagn, A. 34 

mapaduvar, 

maoaxpouots, T. 194 

mapamperBevew or -ecOa, T. 127 


mapackevacev, A. 69 

mapedpeve, T. 21 | 

maperTnkores (pynropes), A. 37 

TmapéoTnoav = évixnOnoav, A. 15 

mapoweiv, A. 62 

matpanolas, IT. 102 

Ilecparas, of €x, T. 134 

meicouar ambiguous, T. 149 

méumrtov wépos, T. 7 

mévre nuttadavtra, A. 17 

mevrTeTnpis, wevtaeTnois, T. 125 

mioris ‘proof,’ A. 22 

awietv for rréov, T. 141 

modokaxkn, T. 105 

moXtTela, A. 30 

mo\XooTos, T. 196 

modXov de?, T. 195 

moutreta, A. 48 

mpaéis...elompakis, ‘exaction,’ A. 
46. 


mpeoBevral.. -Tpéo Bets, T. 12 
mpoawywv, mpoayay, A. 59 
mpoapetoba, T. 200 
mpoBadrea0a, T. 160 

mpodocia, T. 127 

mpoedpo, mpoedpevev, A. 9, T. 21 
mpoevtropeia bat, T. 97 

mpotecOar, A. 37 

apos, adverbial, A. 75 
mpotayuwyevs, T. 161 
mpocevtopetcba, T. 97 
mpocierOa, T. 156 
mpocxaraBvnua, T. 97 

mpocodos, ‘access,’ T. 48 
mpooreprauBare, T. 44 
TpoorTiuav, mpooriunua, T.2, 103 
mpootplBecOa, A, 75 
mporpépecba, A. 69 
m™pooxAevacev Or mporexxr. T. 15 
mpoxetporovetv, 'T. 11 


ri 
p@d.ov mpadyua, A, 42 
2. 
oKevn, T. 114 
oKevn pepe, oxevogpopev, A. 56 
oKYpopopesy, T. 15 
oTaols (rhetorical), A. Arg. 


ovyyerns, dvaykatos, T. 67 
av\a, cvAq, T. Arg. 


INDEX. 261 


civéixo, T. 23 
astvedpa, T. 127 
cuveperv, tenses of, A. 38 
ouveornkortes (pnropes), A. 37 
auvyyopa, T. 23 
ovoxevagew, T. 206 
cxodavew Til or év tun, A. 4 
owfew, A. 64 
ows monosyll., T. 106 

ig 
rauias, A. 35, 70 
Tauever, T. 129 
rags, T. 46 
TAUTOV, TOLOUTOV, TocoUTOY neuter, 

A. 2, 75, T. 183 
texunpiov, A. 22 
retrapdxovra, ol, T. 112 
TH apxnv =apxnv, adverbial, A. 
5, 32 

tynvixavta, T. 77 
Tiyswwpla, T, 87 
root ‘posts,’ T. 216 
Tov wy Omitted with infin., T, 61 
Tpinporool, A, 17 
Tpitos, A. 8 

#4 


UBpis, UBpews ypapn, A. 54 
umepnuepos, T. 97 


vanpérns, T. 14 
UrohauBavew, A. 4, 
vromwimrew (late Greek), A. Arg. 


®, 
gavr0os, A. 12, T. 85 
pevaxitev, constructions of, A, 34 
gdevaxicpos, T. 194 
pbavew, T. 143 
gary, A. 69 
diroTiuia, A. 73 
gpravpos, A. 12, T. 158 
Pud7s, ol ao, T. 134 


X. 


xépviBov, xépvuy, A. 78 
xowrxldes, A. 72 
xpnuarifew, T. 21, 29, 55 
xpnuatif~ecOa, T. 201 
xpnotos, T. 53 


Vv. 
YevSovaprupiov Sixn, T. 131 
Wros Aoyos, A, 22 

2. 
wero detv, ironical, A, 32 
wrios, A. 15 
onrra, T. 66 
wpre xiAlas, T. 7 


ENGLISH INDEX. 


The figures refer to the Sections. 


A 


Academy, T. 114 

accusative, double, T. 12, 198 

alternative penalty proposed by 
defendant, T. 138 

ambassadors, rarely single, T. 
138 

ambiguities avoided in laws, T. 
34 


antithesis, examples of, A. 56, 
T. 128 
aorist, rendered as a present, T. 
206 
— and perfect confused in late 
Greek, A. Arg. 
apologies for alluding to mis- 


fortunes, A. 55, 62, T. 132, 
200 
Archinus, T. 135 
Aristophon, T. 11 
atimia, when inherited, A. 34 
attraction of nominative, T. 73 
— unusual, A. 64, 77, T. 185 


B. 


Badham, Dr. C., quoted, A. 25 

Bentley quoted, A. 12 

blending of two modes of ex- 
pression, A. 1, 17, 29, 35 

blinding abhorrent to Greek 
manners, T. 140 


262 


C. 


Caillemer, Prof. E. quoted, A. 
27, T. 112 
Callistratus, orator, A. 66, T. 


135 

Campbell, Prof. L., on ‘Sopho- 
cles, quoted, T. 32, 39 

checking-clerks, A. 38 

citizens, number of Athenian, 
A. 35 

clannishness of ancient life, T. 
67 

clap-trap, T. 37 

Cleon, T. 126 

coin, debasement of, in France 
and England, T. 213 

— excellence of Athenian, ibid. 

coining, punishment of false, T. 
212 


commerce, hazardous nature of, 
A, 37 

— low estimate of, T. 213 

contractions, exceptional (in 
verbs), A. 68; (in nouns), T. 
138 

Cope, E. M. (on Aristotle’s 
Rhetoric) quoted, A. 22, T. 
73 

Coreyra, politics of, T. 149, 202 

corrupt passages, A. 20, 67, 74, 
T. 171, 187, 217 

cross-examination little prac- 
tised, A. 23, 47 

Curtius, Prof. G., A. 15, 64 

Cynosarges, T. 114 


D. 


daric, value of, T. 129 

dative of the agent, T. 187 

Dawes’s canon, T. 55, 107 

debtors, state, T. 96 

Decelea, A. 15, T. 128 

deficits, A. 48, T. 79, 97 

Diaetetae, two kinds of, A. 27 

— number of, ibid. 

dicasteries, composition of, T. 9 

Dindorf, his text departed from, 
T. 59, 195 

dishonesty, proneness to, A. 48, 
RY 5 


INDEX. 


distraint at Athens, A. 
197 

district judges, T. 112 

distrust of public men, T. 193 

Dobree’s Adversaria, quoted, A. 
4, 8, 42, 59, 74, T. 42, 47, 
102, 137 ; , 


56, T. 


E. 


Egypt at war with Persia, T. 12 

Eleven, powers of the, T. 63 

emendations proposed, T. 387, 
141 

enacting clauses in Greek and 
Latin, T. 20 

enallage of dual, T. 9 

epanadiplosis, A. 78 

Epistates, T. 21; two kinds of, 
ibid. 

Eponymi, T. 18 

Euboea, relief of, A. 14 

Eucleides, archonship of, T. 42, 
133 

Eumolpidae, A. 27 

Evander (archon), T. 42, 138 

exclusiveness of Athenian de- 
mocracy, A. 48, T. 103 


F. 


final conjunctions with past 
tenses of indic., A. 21, 28, T. 
48 

foreign marriages forbidden, A. 
3, T. 203 

forfeitures, various, T. 45 

frivolous accusations, penalty 
for; A. 3; Tat 

futurum exactum (paulo post 
futurum), T. 85 


G. 


Gallenga, Mr, quoted, T. 78 

genitive after els rovro, A. 16 

— of final cause, T. 36 

— of price after ryuav, T. 39, 
218 

Glauketes, T. 128 

Grands Jours (extraordinary 
assizes), T. 76 ° 

Gymnasia, public and private, 
T. 114 


INDEX. 


H. 


Hager, Dr Herman, on Hisan- 
gelia, T. 63 
Harpocration, quoted, A. Arg. A. 
20, 26, 30, 38, 48, 66, 78, . 
37, 50, 126, 184,158. 
heliastic oath, T. 21, 58, 149 ff. 
hiatus, A, 31, T. 55, 72, 183 
Hypereides on Athenian juries, 
TL 175 
I. 


imperfect, infinitive and parti- 
ciple, A. 25, 41, T. 7, 202 

impiety, prosecutions for, A. 27 

impoverishment of Athenian 
exchequer, period of, A. 48 

imprisonment, limits of, A. 27 

inconsistent laws, T. 32—35 

indeclinable use of w\éov and 
éXatroyv, T. 141 

indicative interchanged with 
optative, A. 36, 66 

indifference to human life, A. 
48, T. 125 

infinitive of the perfect, T. 60, 
84, 115, 203 

ingratitude to sons of great 
men, T. 127 

inscriptions quoted, A. 27, 64, 
T. 11, 134, 150 

ironical use of wero detv, A. 22, 
56, 63; of n&iwoev, T. 65 

Isocrates, imitated by Demo- 
sthenes, T. 46 

J. 

Jebb, Prof. R. C., quoted, A. 26, 
T. 72, 103, 138 

juries, numbers of, T. 9 

juries, attitude of counsel to- 
wards, A. 11, 42, T. 75, 175 

K, 
Kronia, festival of, T. 26 


L. 
Laches, T. 126 
laws, new, exhibited in writing, 
T. 18 
legal language, archaisms in, 
license of invective at Athens 
and Rome, T, 143 


263 


Livy, quoted, T. 75 
Lobeck on Soph. Ajax quoted, 
T. 6 


— on Phrynichus quoted, T. 
125, 207 

Locri, laws of Zaleucus at, T. 
139 ff. 

Longinus (or pseudo-Longinus) 
mepi Uwous quoted, T. 208 

Lord Campbell’s Act (law of 
libel), A. 62 

Lyceum, T, 114 


M. 


Mahaffy, Prof. J. P., quoted, A. 
35, 48, 54, 78, T. 79, 125, 136 

majority, age of, T. 151 

Manzoni, Promessi Sposi, T. 76 

Mausolus, T. 12 

Melanopus, T. 126 f. 

military offences, T, 103 


N. 
Naucratis, T. 11 
Nausinicus, changes in the 


archonship of, A. 44 
negative after verbs of thinking, 
gy 
Nomothetae, T. 21 
— numbers of, T. 27 


0. 


Oligarchical insolence, T. 76 
Olympieion long unfinished, A. 
76 


Oriental mind, resemblance to, 
T. 128 
— contrasts to, A. 75, T. 140 


P. 


Paley, Prof. F. A., quoted, A. 
£7,-38;:62, B.d31, ..: 

Panathenaea, T. 26 

Parthenon, date of, A. 13 

— treasury of, T. 136 

perfect and aorist confused in 
late Greek, A. Arg. 

perfect passive, doubtful forms 
of, A. 4, T. 175 

— with dat. of agent, T. 187 

Perrot, Mons. G., quoted, A. 27, 
T. 149 

personal dignity, T. 112 


264 


Plato’s Laws, T. 112 

political economy, T. 136 

prisoners released on parole, A. 
68, T. 125 

privilegia, T. 18, 59, 60 

procedure, Attic, A. 26 

Proedri, T, 21 

pronouns, change of, T. 122, 198 

pronunciation, modern Greek, 
T. 85, 171 

Propylaea, date of, A. 13 

prosecutions of orators and 
generals, A. 66 

prytanies, how arranged, A. Arg. 

prytany, ninth, T. 15, 40, 87 

putting questions to the vote, 
responsibility for, A. 9, T. 50 


Q. 
quantity of ain ddoKoua, T, 77 
Quintilian referred to, A, Arg. 
A. 56 
R. 


relative with infin. in orat. obl., 
T. 212 

repealing statutes, T. 32 

restitutions, twofold or tenfold, 
T. 82, 105, 114 

restored democracy, characteris- 
tics of, T. 154. ‘See also 
Eucleides. 

retrospective legislation, T. 42 
ff. 57 f. 

revenge, Greek view of, A. 3 

revolutionary times, characte- 
ristics of, T. 149 

Rutherford’s New Phrynichus 
quoted, A. 4, T. 125, 129 


8 


Sainte-Ampoule, T. 129 

Sandys, Mr. J. E., quoted, A. 3, 
26, 38, 59, 62, 66, 75, T. 72, 
111, 114, 160, 199 

Sauppe, Prof. Hermann, conjec- 
tures by, T. 111, 139, 217 

Scipio Barbatus, epitaph of, T. 
211 

self-respect, Demosthenes’ 
growth in, T. 78 


INDEX. 


Shilleto, R., on de Falsa Lega. 
tione, quoted, A, 12, 14, 34, 
87, 40, 62, 68, T. 21, 67, 82, 
111, 132, 157, 214 

Smith, P. Vernon, English In- 
stitutions, A, 62 

Solon, A. 25, 30, T. 103, 106, 
211 f. . 

Sophocles’ love of artificial ex- 
pression. T’, 196 

sureties required to be substan- 
tial, T. 85, 144 

di 


taxes, farmers of, T. 40, 59 

theft, various remedies for, A. 26 

— laws of, T, 105, 113, 114 

Theognis a witness to political 
dissensions, T’. 149 

Thirty, the, A. 52, T. 42, 56 f. 
76 

— liberators of Athens from, 
T. 134 

Thompson, Rey. Dr, on Plato, 
A. 13, 22, 25 

Thrasybulus of Collytus, T, 134 

Thucydides on the Revolution 
of 411, T. 154 

tithes, different kinds of, T. 120 

treason not always capitally 
punished, T, 127 

treuga Dei, T. 29 

Trevelyan’s Early Life of Fox, 
T. 76 

Vv 


Valckenaer quoted, A. 12 
variety, love of, A. 36, T. 32, 
82 


verbs in -evw, T. 129 
vicarious penalties, T, 141 
Victory, statue of, T, 121 


X. 


Xenophon, a passage in Helle- 
nica explained, T. 73 

— the [lopx a work of his old 
age, T. 214 


Z 


Zaleucus, laws of, T, 139 
Zetetae, T. 11 





CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. & SON, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


UNIVERSITY PREss, CAMBRIDGE, 
Fanuary, 1882. 


CATALOGUE OF 


WORKS 


PUBLISHED FOR THE SYNDICS 


OF THE 


Cambringe Cnibersity Press. 





Dondon: 
CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, 17 PATERNOSTER ROW. 





Cambrivge: DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. 
Hripsig; F. A. BROCKHAUS. 


PORE ners ok 
13/1/82 


PUBLICATIONS OF. 
Che Cambridge Anibersitp. Press. 





THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, &c. 


THE CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE 


of the Authorized English Version, with the Text Revised by a Colla- 
tion of its Early and other Principal Editions, the Use of the Italic 
Type made uniform, the Marginal References remodelled, and a Criti- 
cal Introduction prefixed, by the Rev. F. H. SCRIVENER, M.A.,LL.D., 
Editor of the Greek Testament, Codex Augiensis, &c., and one of 


the Revisers of the Authorized Version. Crown 4to. cloth. gilt. 


From the 77zes. 


**Students of the Bible should be particu- 
larly grateful to (the Cambridge University 
Press) for having produced, with the able as- 
sistance of Dr Scrivener, a complete critical 
edition of the Authorized Version of the Eng- 
lish Bible, an edition such as, to use the words 
of the Editor, ‘would have been executed 
long ago had this version been nothing more 
than the greatest and best known of English 
classics.’ Falling at a time when the formal 
revision of this version has been undertaken 
by a distinguished company of scholars and 
divines, the publication of this edition must 
be considered most opportune.” 


From the Atheneum. 

** Apart from its religious importance, the 
English Bible has the glory, which but few 
sister versions indeed can claim, of being the 
chief classic of the language, of having, in 
conjunction with Shakspeare, and in an im- 
measurable degree more than he, fixed the 
language beyond any possibility of important 
change. Thus the recent contributions to the 
literature of the subject, by such workers as 
Mr Francis Fry and Canon Westcott, appeal to 
a wide range of sympathies; and to these may 
now be added Dr Scrivener, well known for 
his labours in the cause of the Greek Testa- 
ment criticism, who has brought out, for the 
Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, 
an edition of the English Bible, according to 
the text of 1611, revised by a comparison with 
later issues on principles stated by him in his 


21S; 


and of such features as the marginal notes, 
the use of italic type, and the changes of or- 
thography, as well as into the most interesting 
question as to the original texts from which 
our translation is produced.” 


From the Methodist Recorder. 


**This noble quarto of over 1300 pages is 
in every respect worthy of editor and pub- 
lishers alike. The name of the Cambridge 
University Press is guarantee enough for its 
perfection in outward form, the name of the 
editor is equal guarantee for the worth and 
accuracy of its contents. Without question, 
it is the best Paragraph Bible ever published, 
and its reduced price of a guinea brings it 
within reach of a large number of students. . 
But the volume is much more than a Para- 
graph Bible. It is an attempt, and a success- 
ful attempt, to give a critical edition of the 
Authorised English Version, not (let it be 
marked) a revision, but an exact reproduc- 
tion of the original Authorised Version, as 
published in 1611, minus patent mistakes. 
This is doubly necessary at a time when the 
version is about to undergo revision. .. To 
all who at this season seek a suitable volume 
for presentation to ministers or teachers we 
earnestly commend this work.” 


From the London Quarterly Review. 


‘*The work is worthy in every respect of 
the editor’s fame, and of the Cambridge 
University Press. The noble English Ver- 
sion, to which our country and religion owe 


Introduction. Here heenters at length into 


L so much, was probably never presented be- 
the history of the chief editions of the version, 


fore in so perfect a form.” 


THE CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE. | 
STUDENT’S EDITION, on good writing paper, with one column of 
print and wide margin to each page for MS. notes. This edition will 
be found of great use to those who are engaged in the task of 
Biblical criticism. Two Vols. Crown 4to. cloth. gilt. 315. 6d. 


THE LECTIONARY BIBLE, WITH APOCRYPHA, 


divided into Sections adapted to the Calendar and Tables of Lessons 
of 1871. Crown 8vo. cloth. 35. 6d. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS BOOKS. 3 


BREVIARIUM 
AD USUM INSIGNIS ECCLESIAE SARUM. 


Fasciculus II. In quo continentur PSALTERIUM, cum ordinario Officii 
totius hebdomadae juxta Horas Canonicas, et proprio Completorii, 
LITANIA, COMMUNE SANCTORUM, ORDINARIUM MISSAE CUM 
CANONE ET XllI MIssis, &c. &c. juxta Editionem maximam pro 
CLAUDIO CHEVALLON ET FRANCISCO REGNAULT A.D. MDXXXI. in 
Alma Parisiorum Academia impressam: labore ac studio FRANCISCI 
PROCTER, A.M., ET CHRISTOPHORI WORDSWORTH, A.M. Demy 
8vo. cloth. 12s. 





In the Press. 


““We have here the first instalment of the 


FASCICULUS I. 


** Not only experts in liturgiology, but all 
persons interested in the history of the 
Anglican Book of Common Prayer, will be 
grateful to the Syndicate of the Cambridge 
University Press for forwarding the publica- 
tion of the volume which bears the above 
title, and which has recently appeared under 
their auspices.””—Wodes and Queries. 


celebrated Sarum Breviary, of which no en- 
tire edition has hitherto been printed since 
the year 1557... Of the valuable explanatory 
notes, as well as the learned introduction to 
this volume, we can oniy speak in terms of the 
very highest commendation.”"—T7he Zx- 
aminer. 


GREEK AND ENGLISH TESTAMENT, 
in parallel Columns on the same. page. Edited by J. SCHOLEFIELD, 
M.A. late Regius Professor of Greek in the University. Small 
O¢tavo. New Edition, with the Marginal References as arranged 
and revised by Dr SCRIVENER. Cloth. red edges. 7s. 6d. 


GREEK AND ENGLISH TESTAMENT, 


THE STUDENT’S EDITION of the above, on large writing paper. sto. 


cloth. 12s. 
GREEK TESTAMENT, 


ex editione Stephani tertia, 1550. Small 8vo. 35. 6a. 


THE NEW TESTAMENT IN GREEK 
according to the text followed in the Authorised Version, with the 
Variations adopted in the Revised Version. Edited by F. H. A. 
SCRIVENER, M.A., D.C.L., LL.D. Crown 8vo. 6s. Morocco boards 
or limp. 12s. 

THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES, 


With Notes and Introduction. By the Very Rev. E. H. PLUMPTRE, 
D.D., Dean of Wells. Large Paper Edition. Demy 8vo. 75. 6d. 


** No one can say that the Old Testament 
is a dull or worn-out subject after reading 
this singularly attractive and also instructive 
commentary. Its wealth of literary and his- 
torical illustration surpasses anything to 


which we can point in English exegesis of 
the Old Testament; indeed, even Delitzsch, 
whose pride it is to leave no source of illus- 
tration unexplored, is far inferior on this head 
to Dr Plumptre.”—Academy, Sept. 10, 1881. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MATTHEW 
in Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions, synoptically arranged: 
with Collations of the best Manuscripts. By J. M. KEMBLE, M.A. 
and Archdeacon HARDWICK. Demy 4to. Ios. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MARK 
in Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions synoptically arranged: 
with Collations exhibiting all the Readings of all the MSS. Edited 
by the Rev. Professor SKEAT, M.A. late Fellow of Christ’s College, 
and author of a Ma&:so-GOTHIC Dictionary. Demy 4to. Ios. 





London; Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 
I—2 


4 PUBLICATIONS OF 





THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST LUKE, 


uniform with the preceding, edited by the Rev. Professor SKEAT, 


Demy 4to. 108. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST JOHN, 


uniform with the preceding, by the same Editor. 


“©The Gospel according to St Fohn, in 
Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions: 
Edited for the Syndics of the University 
Press, by the Rev. Walter W. Skeat, M.A., 
Elrington and Bosworth Professor of Anglo- 
Saxon in the University of Cambridge, 
completes an undertaking designed and 
commenced by that distinguished scholar, 

Kemble, some forty years ago. He 
was not himself permitted to execute his 
scheme; he died before it was completed 
for St Matthew. The edition of that Gospel 
was finished by Mr., subsequently Arch- 
deacon, Hardwick. ‘The remaining Gospels 


Demy 4to. 10s. 


have had the good fortune to be edited by 
Professor Skeat, whose competency and zeal 
have left nothing undone to prove himself 
equal to his reputation, and to produce a 
work of the highest value to the student 
of Anglo-Saxon. The design was indeed 
worthy of its author. It is difficult to ex- 
aggerate the value of such a set of parallel 
texts. 2... the particular volume now 
before us, we can only say it is worthy of its 
two predecessors. We repeat that the ser- 
vice rendered to the study of Anglo-Saxon 
by this Synoptic collection cannot easily be 
overstated.” —Contemporary Review, 


THE POINTED PRAYER BOOK, 


being the Book of Common Prayer with the Psalter or Psalms of 


David, pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches, 


24mo. Cloth. Is. 6d. 


Royal 


The same in square 32mo. cloth. 6d. 


**The ‘ Pointed Prayer Book’ deserves 
mention for the new and ingenious system 
on which the pointing has been marked, 


and still more for the terseness and clear- 
ness of the directions given for using it.”— 


Tines. 


THE CAMBRIDGE PSALTER, 


for the use of Choirs and Organists. Specially adapted for Congre- 
gations in which the “Cambridge Pointed Prayer Book” is used, 
Demy 8vo. cloth extra, 3s. 6d. Cloth limp, cut flush. 25. 6d. 


THE PARAGRAPH PSALTER, 
arranged for the use of Choirs by BROOKE Foss WESTCOTT, D.D., 
Canon of Peterborough, and Regius Professor of Divinity in the 
University of Cambridge. Fcap. 4to. 5s. 


The same in royal 32mo. Cloth 1s. 


“The Paragraph Psalter exhibits all 
the car@, thought, and learning that those 
acquainted with the works of the Regius 
Professor of Divinity at Cambridge would 


Leather Is. 62. 


expect to find, and there is not a clergyman 
or organist in England who should be with- 
out this Psalter as a work of reference.”— 
Morning Post. 


THE MISSING FRAGMENT OF THE LATIN 
TRANSLATION oF THE FOURTH BOOK oF EZRA, 
discovered, and edited with an Introduction and Notes, and a 
facsimile of the MS., by ROBERT L. BENSLyY, M.A., Sub-Librarian 
of the University Library, and Reader in Hebrew, Gonville and Caius 
' College, Cambridge. Demy 4to. Cloth. tos. 


*‘ Edited with true scholarly complete- added a new chapter to the Bible, and, start- 
ness.” —-Westminster Review. ling as the statement may at first sight ap- 


“Wer sich je mit dem 4 Buche Esra 
eingehender beschiaftigt hat, wird durch die 
obige, in jeder Beziehung musterhafte Pub- 
lication in freudiges Erstaunen versetzt wer- 
den.” —Tkheologische Literaturzeitung. 

**It has been said of this book that it has 


pear, it is no exaggeration of the actual fact, 
if by the Bible we understand that of the 
larger size which contains the Apocrypha, 
and if the Second Book of Esdras can be 
fairly called a part of the Apocrypha.”— 
Saturday Review. 





London; Cambridge Warehouse, 13 Paternoster Row, 


- 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 5 





THEOLOGY—(ANCIENT). 


THE PALESTINIAN MISHNA, 
By W. H. Lowe, M.A. Lecturer in Hebrew at Christ’s College, 


Cambridge. 


[ln the Press. 


SAYINGS OF THE JEWISH FATHERS, 
comprising Pirge Aboth and Pereq R. Meir in Hebrew and English, 


with Critical and Illustrative Notes. 


By CHARLES TAYLOR, D.D. 


Master of St John’s College, Cambridge, and Honorary Fellow of 


King’s College, London. 

“It is peculiarly incumbent on those who 
look to Jerome or Origen for their theology or 
exegesis to learn something of their Jewish 
predecessors. The New Testament abounds 
with sayings which remarkably coincide with, 
or closely resemble, those of the Jewish 
Fathers; and these latter probably would 
furnish more satisfactory and frequent illus- 
trations of its text than the Old Testament.” 
—Saturday Review. 

“The ‘Masseketh Aboth’ stands at the 
head of Hebrew non-canonical writings. It 
is of ancient date, claiming to contain the 
dicta of teachers who flourished from B.C. 200 
to the same year of our era. The precise 
time of its compilation in its present form is, 
of course, in doubt. Mr Taylor’s explana- 
tory and illustrative commentary is very full 
and satisfactory.” —Sfectator. 

“‘If we mistake not, this is the first pre- 
cise translation into the English language 


Demy 8vo. cloth. 


Ios. 


accompanied by scholarly notes, of any por- 
tion of the Talmud. In other words, it is 
the first instance of that most valuable and 
neglected portion of Jewish literature being 
treated in the same way as a Greek classic 
in an ordinary critical edition... The Tal- 
mudic books, which have been so strangely 
neglected, we foresee will be the most im- 
portant aids of the future for the proper un- 
derstanding of the Bible... The Sayznzgs of 
the Fewish Fathers may claim to be scholar- 
ly, and, moreover, of a scholarship unusually 
thorough and finished.”—Dudblixz Univer- 
sity Magazine. 

**A careful and thorough edition which 
does credit to English scholarship, of a short 
treatise from the Mishna, containing a series 
of sentences or maxims ascribed mostly to 
Jewish teachers immediately preceding, or 
immediately following the Christian era, . .” 
—Contemporary Review. 


THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA’S COMMENTARY 


ON THE MINOR EPISTLES OF S. PAUL. 
The Latin Version with the Greek Fragments, edited from the MSS. 
with Notes and an Introduction, by H. B. SWETE, D.D., Rector of 
Ashdon, Essex, and late Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, 
Cambridge. In Two Volumes. Vol. I., containing the Introduction, 
with Facsimiles of the MSS., and the Commentary upon Galatians— 
Colossians. Demy 8vo. 12s. 


**One result of this disappearance of the 
works of Diodorus, which his Arian oppo- 
nents did their utmost to destroy, is to render 
more conspicuous the figure of Theodore. 
From the point of view of scientific exegesis 
there is no figure in all antiquity more in- 
teresting.”—The Expositor. 

‘In dem oben verzeichneten Buche liegt 
uns die erste Halfte einer vollstandigen, 
ebenso sorgfaltig gearbeiteten wie schén 
ausgestatteten Ausgabe des Commentars mit 
ausfiihrlichen Prolegomena und reichhaltigen 
kritischen und erliuternden Anmerkungen 
vor.”—Literarisches Centralblatt, 

“Tt is the result of thorough, careful, and 
patient investigation of all the points bearing 
on the subject, and the results are presented 
with admirable good sense and modesty. Mr 
Swete has prepared himself for his task by a 
serious study of the literature and history 
which are connected with it; and he has pro- 


VQLUME II. 


duced a volume of high value to the student, 
not merely of the theology of the fourth and 
fifth centuries, but of the effect of this theo- 
logy on the later developments of doctrine 
and methods of interpretation, in the ages 
immediately following, and in the middle 
ages.” Guardian. 

** Auf Grund dieser Quellen ist der Text 
bei Swete mit musterhafter Akribie herge- 
stellt. Aber auch sonst hat der Herausgeber 
mit unermiidlichem Fleisse und eingehend- 
ster Sachkenntniss sein Werk mit allen den- 
jenigen Zugaben ausgeriistet, welche bei einer 
solchen Text-Ausgabe nur irgend erwartet. 
werden kénnen. . .. Von den drei Haupt- 
handschriften . .. sind vortreffliche photo- 
graphische Facsimile’s beigegeben, wie iiber- 
haupt das ganze Werk von der University 
Press zu Cambridge mit bekannter Eleganz ~ 
ausgestattet ist.” —Theologische Literatur- 
zettung. 


In the Press. 





London: Cambridge. Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row 


6 PUBLICATIONS OF 





SANCTI IRENAI EPISCOPI LUGDUNENSIS 
libros quinque adversus Heereses, versione Latina cum Codicibus 
Claromontano ac Arundeliano denuo collata, preemissa de placitis 
Gnosticorum prolusione, fragmenta necnon Greece, Syriace, Armeniace, 
commentatione perpetua et indicibus variis edidit W. WIGAN HARVEY, 
S.T.B. Collegii Regalis olim Socius. 2 Vols. Demy 8vo. 18s. 


M. MINUCII FELICIS OCTAVIUS. 
The text newly revised from the original MS., with an English Com- 
mentary, Analysis, Introduction, and Copious Indices. Edited by 
H. A. HOLDEN, LL.D. Head Master of Ipswich School, late Fellow 
of Trinity College, Cambridge. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 


THEOPHILI EPISCOPI ANTIOCHENSIS 
LIBRI TRES AD AUTOLYCUM 


edidit, Prolegomenis Versione Notulis Indicibus instruxit GULIELMUS 
GILSON HuMPHRY, S.T.B. Collegii Sanéliss. Trin. apud Cantabri- 
gienses quondam Socius. Post 8vo. 5s. 


THEOPHYLACTI IN EVANGELIUM 
S. MATTHAI COMMENTARIUS, 
edited by W. G. HUMPHRY, B.D. Prebendary of St Paul’s, late 
Fellow of Trinity College. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
TERTULLIANUS DE CORONA -MILITIS, DE 

SPECTACULIS, DE IDOLOLATRIA, 
with Analysis and English Notes, by GEORGE CURREY, D.D. Preacher 
at the Charter House, late Fellow and Tutor of St John’s College. 
Crown 8vo. 55. 





THEOLOGY—(ENGLISH). 


WORKS OF ISAAC BARROW, 


compared with the Original MSS., enlarged with Materials hitherto 
unpublished. A new Edition, by A. NAPIER, M.A. of Trinity College, 
Vicar of Holkham, Norfolk. 9 Vols. Demy 8vo. £3. 39. 


' TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY, 


and a Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church, by Isaac 
BARROW. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. 


PEARSON’S EXPOSITION OF THE CREED, 


edited by TEMPLE CHEVALLIER, B.D. late Fellow and Tutor of 


St Catharine’s College, Cambridge. New Edition. [J the Press. 
AN ANALYSIS OF THE EXPOSITION OF 
THE CREED 


written by the Right Rev. JOHN PEARSON, D.D. late Lord Bishop 
of Chester, by W. H. MILL, D.D. late Regius Professor of Hebrew 
in the University of Cambridge. Demy 8vo. cloth. 5s. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 7 





WHEATLY ON THE COMMON PRAYER, 


edited by G. E. CORRIE, D.D. Master of Jesus College, Examining 
Chaplain to the late Lord Bishop of Ely. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. © 


CAESAR MORGAN’S INVESTIGATION OF THE 
TRINITY OF PLATO, 

and of Philo Judzeus, and of the effects which an attachment to their 

writings had upon the principles and reasonings of the Fathers of the 

Christian Church. Revised by H. A. HOLDEN, LL.D. Head Master 

of Ipswich School, late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Crow 

8vo. 45. 


TWO FORMS OF PRAYER OF THE TIME OF 


QUEEN ELIZABETH. Now First Reprinted. Demy 8vo. 6d. 


“From ‘Collections and Notes’ 1867— 
1876, by W. Carew Hazlitt (p. 340), we learn 
that—‘A very remarkable volume, in the 
original vellum cover, and containing 25 
Forms of Prayer of the reign of Elizabeth, 
each with the autograph of Humphrey Dyson, 
has lately fallen into the hands of my friend 

r H. Pyne. It is mentioned specially in 
the Preface tothe Parker Society’s volume 


of Occasional Forms of Prayer, but it had 
been lust sight of for 200 years.’ By the 
kindness of the present possessor of this 
valuable volume, containing in all 25 distinct 
publications, I am enabled to reprint in the 
following pages the two Forms of Prayer 
supposed to have been lust,”—E xtract from 
the PREFACE, 


SELECT DISCOURSES, 


by JOHN SMITH, late Fellow of Queens’ College, Cambridge. Edited by 
H. G. WILLIAMS, B.D. late Professor of Arabic. Royal 8vo. 7s. 6d. 


“<The ‘Select Discourses’ of John Smith, 
collected and published from his papers after 
his death, are, in my opinion, much the most 
considerable work left to us by this Cambridge 
School [the Cambridge Platonists]. They 
have a right to a place in English literary 
history.”,—Mr MatrHew ARNOLD, in the 
Contemporary Review. 


“Of all the products of the Cambridge | 


School, the ‘Select Discourses’ are perhaps 
the highest, as they are the most accessible 
and the most widely appreciated...and indeed 
no spiritually thoughtful mind can read them 
unmoved. ‘They carry us so directly into an 
atmosphere of divine philosophy, luminous 


with the richest lights of meditative genius... 
He was one of those rare thinkers in whom 
largeness of view, and depth, and wealth of 
poetic and speculative insight, only served to 
evoke more fully the religious spirit, and 
while he drew the mould of his thought from 
Plotinus, he vivified the substance of it from 
St Paul.”—Principal TuLtocu, Aationad 
Theology in England in the 17th Century. 

‘“We may instance Mr Henry Griffin 
Williams’s revised edition of Mr John Smith’s 
‘Select Discourses,’ which have won Mr 
Matthew Arnold’s admiration, as an example 
of worthy work for an University Press to 
undertake.” —7tmes. 


THE HOMILIES, 


with Various Readings, and the Quotations from the Fathers given 
at length in the Original Languages. Edited by G. E. CoRRIE, D.D. 
Master of Jesus College. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. 


DE OBLIGATIONE CONSCIENTIZ£ PRAELEC- 
TIONES decem Oxonii in Schola Theologica habitze a ROBERTO 
SANDERSON, SS. Theologiz ibidem Professore Regio. With English 
Notes, including an abridged Translation, by W. WHEWELL, D.D. 
late Master of Trinity College. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


8 PUBLICATIONS OF 


ARCHBISHOP USHER’S ANSWER TO A JESUIT, 


with other Tracts on Popery. Edited by J. SCHOLEFIELD, M.A. late 
Regius Professor of Greek in the University. Demy 8vo, 7s. 6d. 


WILSON’S ILLUSTRATION OF THE METHOD 
of explaining the New Testament, by the early opinions of Jews and 
Christians concerning Christ. Edited by T. TURTON, D.D. late Lord 
Bishop of Ely. Demy 8vo. 53s. 


LECTURES ON DIVINITY 


delivered in the University of Cambridge, by JOHN Hey, D.D. 
Third Edition, revised by T. TURTON, D.D. late Lord Bishop of Ely. 
2vols. Demy 8vo. I5s. 








ARABIC AND SANSKRIT. 


POEMS OF BEHA ED DIN ZOHEIR OF EGYPT. 


With a Metrical Translation, Notes and Introduction, by E. H. 
PALMER, M.A., Barrister-at-Law of the Middle Temple, Lord 
Almoner’s Professor of Arabic and Fellow of St John’s College 


in the University of Cambridge. 
Vol. I. The ARABIC TEXT. 
Vol. II. 


** Professor Palmer’s activity in advancing 
Arabic scholarship has formerly shown itself 
in the production of his excellent Arabic 
Grammar, and his Descriptive Catalogue of 
Arabic MSS. in the Library of Trinity Col- 
lege, Cambridge. He has now produced an 
admirable text, which illustrates in a remark- 
able manner the flexibility and graces of the 
language he loves so well, and of which he 
seems to be perfect master.... The Syndicate 
of Cambridge University must not pass with- 
out the recognition of their liberality in 
bringing out, in a worthy form, so important 
an Arabic text. It is not the first time that 
Oriental scholarship has thus been wisely 
subsidised by Cambridge.”—Judian Mail. 

** [tis impossible to quote this edition with- 
out an expression of admiration for the per- 
fection to which Arabic typography has been 
brought in England in this magnificent Ori- 
ental work, the production of which redounds 
to the imperishable credit of the University 
of Cambridge. It may be pronounced one of 
the most beautiful Oriental books that have 
ever been printed in Europe: and the learning 
of the Editor worthily rivals the technical 
get-up of the creations of the soul of one of 
the most tasteful poets of Isl4m, the study 
of which will contribute not a little to save 
honour of the poetry of the Arabs,”— 
MyTHOLOGY AMONG THE HEsBREws (Zxgi. 
Transi.), p. 19 


4. ; 
“For ease and facility, for variety of 


3 vols, Crown 4to. 
10s. 6d@.; Cloth extra. 
ENGLISH TRANSLATION. 


155. 
10s. 6a.; Cloth extra. 155. 


metre, for imitation, either designed or un- 
conscious, of the style of several of our own 
poets, these versions deserve high praise. .... 
We have no hesitation in saying that in both 
Prof. Palmer has made an addition to Ori- 
ental literature for which scholars should be 
grateful; and that, while his knowledge of 
Arabic is a sufficient guarantee for his mas- 
tery of the original, his English compositions 
are distinguished by versatility, command of 
language, rhythmical cadence, and, as we 
have remarked, by not unskilful imitations of 
the styles of several of our own favourite 
poets, living and dead.” —Saturday Review. 

** This sumptuous edition of the poems of 
Beha-ed-din Zoheir is a very welcome addi- 
tion to the small series of Eastern poets 
accessible to readers who are not Oriental- 
ists. ... _In all there is that exquisite finish of 
which Arabic poetry is susceptible in so rare 
adegree. The form is almost always beau- 
tiful, be the thought what it may. But this, 
of course, can only be fully appreciated by 
Orientalists, And this brings us to the trans- 
lation. It is excellently. well done. Mr 
Palmer has tried to imitate the fall of the 
original in his selection of the English metre 
for the various pieces, and thus contrives to 
convey a faint idea of the graceful flow of 
the Arabic. ...... Altogether the inside of the 
book is worthy of the beautiful arabesque 
binding that rejoices the eye of the lover of 
Arab art.”—Academy. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 9 





NALOPAKHYANAM, OR, THE TALE OF NALA; 
containing the Sanskrit Text in Roman Characters, followed by a 
Vocabulary in which each word is placed under its root, with references 
to derived words in Cognate Languages, and a sketch of Sanskrit 
Grammar. By the Rev. THOMAS JARRETT, M.A. Trinity College, 
Regius Professor of Hebrew, late Professor of Arabic, and formerly 
Fellow of St Catharine’s College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo. Ios, 


NOTES ON THE TALE OF NALA, 


for the use of Classical Students, by J. PEILE, M.A. Fellow and Tutor 
of Christ’s College. Demy 8vo. 12s. 





GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS, &c. (See also pp. 24—27.) 


A SELECTION OF GREEK INSCRIPTIONS, 
With Introductions and Annotations by E. S. ROBERTS, M.A. 
Fellow and Tutor of Caius College. [ Preparing. 


THE AGAMEMNON OF AESCHYLUS. 


With a Translation in English Rhythm, and Notes Critical and Ex- 
planatory. By BENJAMIN HALL KENNEDY, D.D., Regius Professor 
of Greek. Crown 8vo. cloth. 6s. 


“One of the best editions of the master- 
piece of Greek tragedy.” —A theneum. 
** By numberless other like happy and 


tion of a great undertaking.”—Sazt. Rev. 
**Let me say that I think it a most admira- 
ble piece of the highest criticism... .. like 


weighty helps to a coherent and consistent 
text and interpretation, Dr Kennedy has 
approved himself a guide to Aeschylus of 
certainly peerless calibre.”—Contemp. Rev. 

**Tt is needless to multiply proofs of the 
value of this volume alike to the poetical 
translator, the critical scholar, and the ethical 
student. We must be contented to thank 
Professor Kennedy for his admirable execu- 


your Preface extremely; it is just to the 
point.”—Professor PALEY. 

‘* Professor Kennedy has conferred a boon 
on all teachers of the Greek classics, by caus- 
ing the substance of his lectures at Cam- 
bridge on the Agamemnon of Aéschylus to 
be published...This edition of the Agamemnon 
is one which no classical master should be 
without.” —Z xaminer. 


THE GEDIPUS TYRANNUS OF SOPHOCLES by 


the same Editor. 


Crown 8vo. Cloth 6s. 


THE THEATETUS OF PLATO by the same Editor. 


Crown 8vo, Cloth. 7s. 6d. 


PLATO’S PHAEDO, 
literally translated, by the late E. M. CoPE, Fellow of Trinity College, 


Cambridge. Demy 8vo. 5s. 


ARISTOTLE.—IIEPI AIKAIOZTNH®. 


THE FIFTH BOOK OF THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS OF 
ARISTOTLE. Edited by HENRY JACKSON, M.A., Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo. cloth. 6s. 


‘It is not too much to say that some of 


the points he discusses have never had so 
much light thrown upon them before.... 


Scholars will hope that this is not the only 
portion of the Aristotelian writings which he 
is likely to edit.”—A theneum, 


ARISIOULES PSYCHOLOGY, 


with a Translation, Critical and Explanatory Notes, by EDWIN 
WALLACE, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Worcester College, Oxford. 


[lu the Press. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


i= 


10 PUBLICATIONS OF 


ARISTOTLE. 
THE RHETORIC. With a Commentary by the late E. M. CopE, 
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, revised and edited by J. E. 
Sanpys, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of St John’s College, Cambridge, 
and Public Orator. With a biographical Memoir by H. A.J. MUNRO, 





M.A. Three Volumes, Demy 8vo. 


** This work is in many ways creditable to 
the University of Cambridge. The solid and 
extensive erudition of Mr Cope himself bears 
none the less speaking evidence to the value 
of the tradition which he continued, if it is 
not equally accompanied by those qualities of 
speculative originality and independent judg- 
ment which belong more to the individual 
writer than to his school. And while it must 
ever be regretted that a work so laborious 
should not have received the last touches of 
its author, the warmest admiration is due to 
Mr Sandys, for the manly, unselfish, and un- 
flinching spirit in which he has performed his 
most difficult and delicate task. If an English 
student wishes to have a full conception of 
what is contained in the A4etoric of Aris- 


£1. 115s. 6d. 


totle, to Mr Cope’s edition he must go.”— 
Academy. 

‘* Mr Sandys has performed his arduous 
duties with marked ability and admirable 
tact. ....... When the original Com- 
mentary stops abruptly, three chapters be- 
fore the end of the third book, Mr Sandys 
carefully supplies the deficiency, following 
Mr Cope’s general plan and the slightest 
available indications of his intended treat- 
ment. In Appendices he has reprinted from 
classical journals several articles of Mr 
Cope’s ; and, what is better, he has given the 
best of the late Mr Shilleto’s ‘ Adversaria,’ 
In every part of his work—revising, supple- 
menting, and completing—he has done ex- 
ceedingly well.” —£ xraminer. 


PRIVATE ORATIONS OF DEMOSTHENES, 
with Introductions and English Notes, by F. A. PALEy, M.A. Editor 
of Aeschylus, etc. and J. E. Sanpys, M.A. Fellow and Tutor of St 
John’s College, and Public Orator in the University of Cambridge. 


PART I. Contra Phormionem, Lacritum, Pantaenetum, Boeotum de 


Nomine, Boeotum de Dote, Dionysodorum. 


**Mr Paley’s scholarship is sound and 
accurate, his experience of editing wide, and 
if he is content to devote his learning and 
abilities to the production of such manuals 
as these, they will be received with gratitude 
throughout the higher schools of the country. 
Mr Sandys is deeply read in the German 


Crown 8vo. cloth. 6s. 

literature which bears upon his author, and 
the elucidation of matters of daily life, in the 
delineation of which Demosthenes is so rich, 
obtains full justice at his hands..... We 
hope this edition may lead the way to a more 
general study of these speeches in schools 
than has hitherto been possible.” —Academy. 


PART II. Pro Phormione, Contra Stephanum I. II.; Nicostratum, 


Cononem, Calliclem. 7s. 6d. 
“To give even a brief sketch of these 
speeches [Pro Phormione and Contra Ste- 
phanum) would be incompatible with our 
limits, though we can hardly conceive a task 
more useful to the classical or professional 
scholar than to make one for himself..... 
It is a great boon to those who set them- 
selves to unravel the thread of arguments 
pro and con to have the aid of Mr Sandys’s 
excellent running commentary....and no 
one can say that he is ever deficient 


in the needful help which enables us to 
form a sound estimaté of the rights of the 
It is long since we have come 
upon a work evincing more pains, scholar- 
ship, and varied research and illustration than 
Mr Sandys’s contribution to the ‘ Private 
Orations of Demosthenes’.”—Sat, Rev. 

iki sk hed the edition reflects credit on 
Cambridge scholarship, and ought to be ex- 
tensively used.” —A theneum. 


PINDAR. 


OLYMPIAN AND PYTHIAN ODES. 
and Critical, Introductions and Introductory Essays. 
C. A. M. FENNELL, M.A., late Fellow of Jesus College. 


cloth. 9s. 

‘*Mr Fennell deserves the thanks of all 
classical students for his careful and scholarly 
edition of the Olympian and Pythian odes. 
He brings to his task the necessary enthu- 
siasm for his author, great industry, a sound 
judgment, and, in particular, copious and 
minute learning in comparative philology. 
To his qualifications in this last respect every 
page bears witness.” —A thenaum. 

**Considered simply as a contribution to 


THE NEMEAN AND ISTHMIAN ODES. 


With Notes Explanatory 
Edited by 
Crown 8vo. 


the study and criticism of Pindar, Mr Fen- 
nell’s edition is a work of great merit. But 
it has a wider interest, as exemplifying the 
change which has come over the methods 
and aims of Cambridge scholarship within 
the last ten or twelve years. ... Altogether, 


. this edition is a welcome and wholesome sign 


of the vitality and development of Cambridge 
scholarship, and we are glad to see that it is 
to be continued.”—Saturday Review. 


[Jn the Press. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. II 





THE BACCHAE OF EURIPIDES. 


with Introduction, Critical Notes, and Archzeological Illustrations, 
by J. E. Sanpys, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of St John’s College, Cam- 


bridge, and Public Orator. 


“* Of the present edition of the Bacche by 
Mr Sandys we may safely say that never 
before has a Greek play, in England at 
least, had fuller justice done to its criti- 
cism, interpretation, and archeological il- 
lustration, whether for the young student or 
the more advanced scholar. The Cambridge 
Public Orator may be said to have taken the 
lead in issuing a complete edition of a Greek 
play, which is destined perhaps to gain re- 
doubled favour now that the study of ancient 
monuments has been applied to its illustra- 
tion.” —Saturday Review. 

“Mr Sandys has done well by his poet and 
by his University. He has given a most 
welcome gift to scholars both at home and 
abroad. ‘The illustrations are aptly chosen 
and delicately executed, and the apparatus 
criticus, in the way both of notes and indices 
is very complete.” —otes and Queries. 

‘“‘The volume is interspersed with well- 
executed woodcuts, and its general attractive- 
ness of form reflects great credit on the 
University Press. In the notes Mr Sandys 
has more than sustained his well-earned 
reputation as a careful and learned editor, 
and shows considerable advance in freedom 
and lightness of style. .... Under such cir- 
cumstances it is superfluous to say that for 
the purposes of teachers and advanced stu- 
dents this handsome edition far surpasses all 
its predecessors. The volume will add to the 
already wide popularity of a unique drama, 
and must be reckoned among the most im- 


Crown 8vo cloth. 


10s. 6d. 


portant classical publications of the year.”— 
Atheneum. 

‘This edition of a Greek play deserves 
more than the passing notice accorded to 
ordinary school editions of the classics, It 
has not, like so many such books, been 
hastily produced to meet the momentary 
need of some particular examination; but it 
has employed far some years the labour and 
thought of a highly finished scholar, whose 
aim seems to have been that his book should 
go forth totus teres atgue rotundus, armed 
at all points with all that may throw light 
upon its subject. The result is a work which 
will not only assist the schoolboy or under- 
graduate in his tasks, but will adorn the 
library of the scholar.” . . ‘‘ The description 
of the woodcuts abounds in interesting and 
suggestive information upon various points 
of ancient art, and is a further instance 
of the very thorough as well as scholar- 
like manner in which Mr Sandys deals 
with his subject at every point. The com- 
mentary (pp. 87—240) bears the same stamp 
of thoroughness and high finish as the rest of 
the work. While questions of technical 
grammar receive due attention, textual cri- 
ticism, philology, history, antiquities, and 
art are in turn laid under contribution for the 
elucidation of the poet’s meaning. We must 
leave our readers to use and appreciate for 
themselves Mr Sandys’ assistance.”—7%e 
Guardian. 


M. TULLI CICERONIS DE FINIBUS BONORUM 
ET MALORUM LIBRI QUINQUE. The text revised and ex- 
plained ; With a Translation by JAMES S. REID, M.L., Fellow and 
Assistant Tutor of Gonville and Caius College. [Ln the Press. 


M. T. CICERONIS DE OFFICIIS LIBRI TRES, 
with Marginal Analysis, an English Commentary, and copious Indices, 
by H. A. HOLDEN, LL.D. Head Master of Ipswich School, late Fellow 
of Trinity College, Cambridge, Classical Examiner to the University 
of London. Fourth Edition. Revised and considerably enlarged. 
Crown 8vo. 9s. 


“Dr Holden truly states that ‘Text, ‘Dr Holden has issued an edition of what 


Analysis, and Commentary in this third edi- 
tion have been again subjected to a thorough 
revision.’ It is now certainly the best edition 
extant. ... The Introduction (after Heine) 
and notes leave nothing to be desired in point 
of fulness, accuracy, and neatness ; the typo- 
graphical execution will satisfy the most fas- 
tidious eye.”—Votes and Queries. 


is perhaps the easiest and most popular of 
Cicero’s philosophical works, the de Offciis, 
which, especially in the form which it has now 
assumed after two most thorough revisions, 
leaves little or nothing to be desired in the 
fullness and accuracy of its treatment alike 
of the matter and the language.”—Academy. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


12 PUBLICATIONS OF 





M. TULLII CICERONIS DE NATURA DEORUM 


Libri Tres, with Introduction and Commentary by JOSEPH B. MAYor, 
M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy at King’s College, London, 
formerly Fellow and Tutor of St John’s College, Cambridge, together 
with a new collation of several of the English MSS. by J. H.SwWAINSON, 
M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity Coll.,Cambridge. Vol. I. Demy 8vo. 


10s. 6d. 


**Such editions as that of which Prof. 


Mayor has given us the first instalment will: 


doubtless do much to remedy this undeserved 
neglect. It is one on which great pains and 
much learning have evidently been expended, 
and is in every way admirably suited to meet 
the needs of the student. .... The notes of 
the editor are all that could be expected 
from his well-known learning and scholar- 
ship. .... It is needless, therefore, to say 
that all points of syntax or of Ciceronian 
usage which present themselves have been 
treated with full mastery..... The thanks 
of many students will doubtless be given to 
Prof. Mayor for the amount of historical and 
biographical information afforded in the 


[Vol. II]. Lx the Press. 


commentary, which is, as it should be, sup- 
plemented and not replaced by references 
to the usual authorities.”—Academy. 

**The critical part of Professor Mayor’s 
work appears to be exceedingly welldone. In 
forming the text he has strictly observed the 
methods of modern scholarship, which holds 
itself bound not only to supply a reading 
plausible in itself, but to show how the corrupt 
reading that has to be emended came to take 
its place. A few conjectures of the editor’s 
own are introduced. ...... Professor Mayor 
seems to intend his edition to serve the pur- 
pose of a general introduction to the history 
of Greek philosophy, and his commentary is 
very copious and lucid.” —Saturday Review. 


P. VERGILI MARONIS OPERA 
cum Prolegomenis et Commentario Critico pro Syndicis Preli 
Academici edidit BENJAMIN HALL KENNEDY, S.T.P., Graecae 
Linguae Professor Regius. Extra Fcap. 8vo. cloth. 55. 





MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCE, &c. 


MATHEMATICAL AND PHYSICAL PAPERS. 
By Sir W. THoMmSON, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., Professor of Natural 
Philosophy, in the University of Glasgow. Collected from different 
Scientific Periodicals from May 1841, to the present time. [/ the Press. 


MATHEMATICAL AND PHYSICAL PAPERS, 
By GEORGE GABRIEL STOKES, M.A., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., Fellow 
of Pembroke College, and Lucasian Professor of Mathematics in the 
University of Cambridge. Reprinted from the Original Journals and 
Transactions, with Additional Notes by the Author. Vol. I. Demy 
8vo. cloth. I65s. VoL. Il. Ju the Press. 


THE SCIENTIFIC PAPERS OF THE LATE PROF; 
J. CLERK MAXWELL. Edited by W. D. NIvEN, M.A. In 2 vols. 
Royal 4to. [Ja the Press. 


A TREATISE ON NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 
By Sir W. THomson, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., Professor of Natural 
Philosophy in the University of Glasgow, and P. G. TAIT, M.A., 
Professor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh. 
Vol. I. Part I. Demy 8vo. 16s. 


**In this, the second edition, we notice a 
large amount of new matter, the importance 
of which is such that any opinion which we 


Part if: 


could form within the time at our disposal 
would be utterly inadequate.” —WVature. 


In the Press. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 14 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 13 





ELEMENTS OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 
By Professors Sir W. THOMSON and P. G. TAIT. Part I. Demy 8vo, 


cloth. Second Edition. 9s. 


‘* This work is designed especially for the 
use of schools and junior classes in the Uni- 
versities, the mathematical methods being 
limited almost without exception to those of 
the most elementary geumetry, algebra, and 


A TREATISE ON 


MINANTS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS IN 
AND GEOMETRY, by ROBERT 
Demy 8vo. 


St John’s College, Cambridge. 


‘This able and comprehensive treatise 
will be welcomed by the student as bringing 
within his reach the results of many impor- 
tant researches on this subject which have 
hitherto been for the most part inaccessible 
tohim..... It would be presumptuous on 
the part of any one less learned in the litera- 


trigonometry. Tiros in Natural Philosophy 
cannot be better directed than by being told 
to give their diligent attention to an intel- 
ligent digestion of the contents of this excel- 
lent vade mecum.”—Iron. 


THE THEORY OF DETER- 


ANALYSIS 


FORSYTH Scott, M.A. of 


I2S. 


ture of the subject than Mr Scott to express 
an opinion as to the amount of his own re- 
search contained in this work, but all will 
appreciate the skill with which the results 
of his industrious reading have been arranged 
into this interesting treatise.’”’--A theneum. 


HY DRODYNAMICS, 
A Treatise on the Mathematical Theory of the Motion of Fluids, by 
HORACE LAmB, M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; 
Professor of Mathematics in the University of Adelaide. Demy 8vo. 12s. 


THE ANALYTICAL THEORY OF HEAT, 
By JOSEPH FOURIER. Translated, with Notes, by A. FREEMAN, M.A., 
Fellow of St John’s College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo. 16s. 


“Tt is time that Fourier’s masterpiece, 
The Analytical Theory of Heat, trans- 
lated by Mr Alex. Freeman, should be in- 
troduced to those English students of Mathe- 
matics who do not follow with freedom a 
treatise in any language but their own. It 
is a model of mathematical reasoning applied 
to physical phenomena, and is remarkable for 
the ingenuity of the analytical process em- 
ployed by the author.” — Contemporary 
Review, October, 1878. 

‘*There cannot be two opinions as to the 


value and importance of the Théorie de la 
Chaleur. It has been called ‘an exquisite 
mathematical poem,’ not once but many times, 
independently, by mathematicians of different 
schools. Many of the very greatest of mo- 
dern mathematicians regard it, justly, as the 
key which first opened to them the treasure- 
house of mathematical physics. It is still ¢he 
text-book of Heat Conduction, and there 
seems little present prospect of its being 
superseded, though it is already more than 
half a century old.”—Nature. 


THE ELECTRICAL RESEARCHES OF THE 
HONOURABLE HENRY CAVENDISH, F.R:S. 


Written between 1771 and 1781, Edited from the original manuscripts 
in the possession of the Duke of Devonshire, K.G., by J. CLERK 


MAXWELL, F.R.S. Demy 8vo. cloth. 


**This work, which derives a melancholy 
interest from the lamented death of the editor 
following so closely upon its publication, is a 
valuable addition to the history of electrical 
research. ... The papers themselves are most 
carefully reproduced, with fac-similes of the 
author’s sketches of experimental apparatus. 


18s. 


2 Every department of editorial duty 
appears to have been most conscientiously 
performed ; and it must have been no small 
satisfaction to Prof. Maxwell to see this 
goodly volume completed before his life’s 
work was done.” —A thenzeum. 


AN ELEMENTARY TREATISE on QUATERNIONS, 
By P. G. Tait, M.A., Professor of Natural Philosophy in the Univer- 
sity of Edinburgh. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. 14s. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


14 PUBLICATIONS OF 





A TREATISE ON THE PHYSIOLOGY OF PLANTS, 
by S. H. VINEs, M.A., Fellow of Christ’s College. [Zn the Press. 


THE MATHEMATICAL WORKS OF 


ISAAC BARROW, D.D. 
Edited by W. WHEWELL, D.D. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d. 


COUNTERPOINT. 
A Practical Course of Study, by Professor G. A. MACFARREN, M.A., 
Mus. Doc. Third Edition, revised. Demy 4to. cloth. 7s. 6d. 


ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS 
made at the Observatory of Cambridge by the Rev. JAMES CHALLIS, 
M.A., F.R.S., F.R.A.S., Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experi- 
mental Philosophy in the University of Cambridge, and Fellow of 
Trinity College. For various Years, from 1846 to 1860. 


ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS 
from 1861 to 1865. Vol. XXI. Royal 4to. cloth. 15s. 


A CATALOGUE OF AUSTRALIAN FOSSILS 


(including Tasmania and the Island of Timor), Stratigraphically and 
Zoologically arranged, by ROBERT ETHERIDGE, Jun., F.G.S., Acting 
Palzontologist, H.M. Geol. Survey of Scotland, (formerly Assistant- 
Geologist, Geol. Survey of Victoria). Demy 8vo. cloth. Ios. 6d. 


“The work is arranged with great clear- papers consulted by the author, and an index 
ness, and contains a full list of the books and to the genera.”— Saturday Review. 


ILLUSTRATIONS OF COMPARATIVE ANA- 
TOMY, VERTEBRATE AND INVERTEBRATE, 


for the Use of Students in the Museum of Zoology and Comparative 
Anatomy. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. cloth. 2s. 6d. 


A SYNOPSIS OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF 
THE BRITISH PALASOZOIC ROCKS, 


* by the Rev. ADAM SEDGWICK, M.A., F.R.S., and FREDERICK 


M°Coy, F.G.S. One vol., Royal 4to. Plates, £1. Is. 


A CATALOGUE OF THE COLLECTION OF 
CAMBRIAN AND SILURIAN FOSSILS 
contained in the Geological Museum of the University of Cambridge, 


by J. W. SALTER, F.G.S. With a Portrait of PROFESSOR SEDGWICK. 
Royal 4to. cloth. 7s. 6d. 


CATALOGUE OF OSTEOLOGICAL SPECIMENS 


contained in the Anatomical Museum of the University of Cam- 
bridge. Demy 8vo. 25. 6d. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 15 





LAW. 


AN ANALYSIS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY. 
By E. C. CLARK, LL.D., Regius Professor of Civil Law in the 
University of Cambridge, also of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law. 


Crown 8vo. cloth. 7s. 6d. 

“Prof. Clark’s little book is the sub- 
stance of lectures delivered by him upon 
those portions of Austin’s work on juris- 
prudence which deal with the ‘‘ operation of 


sanctions”... Students of jurisprudence 
will find much to interest and instruct them 
in the work of Prof. Clark.” Atheneum. 


A SELECTION OF THE STATE TRIALS. 
By J. W. WILLIS-BuUND, M.A., LL.B., Barrister-at-Law, Professor of 


Constitutional Law and History, University College, London. 
Crown 8vo. cloth, 18s. 


Trials for Treason (1327—1660). 


** A great and good service has been done 
to all students of history, and especially to 
those of them who look to it in a legal aspect, 
by Prof. J. W. Willis-Bund in the publica- 
tion of a Selection of Cases from the State 
Trials. ... Professor Willis-Bund has been 
very careful to give such selections from the 
State Trials as will best illustrate those 
points in what may be called the growth of 
the Law of Treason which he wishes to 
bring clearly under the notice of the student, 
and the result is, that there is not a page in 
the book which has not its own lesson..... 
In all respects, so far as we have been able 
to test it, this book is admirably done.”— 
Scotsman. 

‘Mr Willis-Bund has edited ‘A Selection 
of Cases from the State Trials’ which is 
likely to form a very valuable addition to 
the standard literature. There can 
be no doubt, therefore, of the interest that 
can be found in the State trials. But they 
are large and unwieldy, and it is impossible 
for the general reader to come across them. 
Mr Willis-Bund has therefore done good 
service in making a selection that is in the 
first volume reduced to a commodious form.” 
—The Examiner. 

“‘Every one engaged, either in teaching 
or in historical inquiry, must have felt the 
want of sucha book, taken from the unwieldy 
volumes of the State Trials.” —Covtemporary 
Review. 

‘This workis a very useful contribution 
to that important branch of the constitutional 
history of England which is concerned with 
the growth and development of the law of 


Vol. II. 


Vol. I. 


treason, as it may be gathered from trials be- 
fore the ordinary courts. ‘he author has 
very wisely distinguished these cases from 
those of impeachment for treason before Par- 
liament, which he proposes to treat in a future 
volume under the general head ‘ Proceedings 
in Parliament.’”— 7he Academy. 

“This is a work of such obvious utility 
that the only wonder is that no one should 
have undertaken it before....In man 
respects therefore, although the trials are 
more or less abridged, this is for the ordinary 
student’s purpose not only a more handy, 
but a more useful work than Howell’s.”— 
Saturday Review. 

“Within the boards of this useful and 
handy book the student will find everything 
he can desire in the way of lists of cases 
given at length or referred to, and the 
Statutes bearing on the text arranged chro- 
nologically. ‘he work of selecting from 
Howell’s bulky series of volumes has peen 
done with much judgment, merely curious 
cases being excluded, and all included so 
treated as to illustrate some important point 
of constitutional law.” —Glasgow Herald. 

“Mr Bund’s object is not the romance, 
but the constitutional and legal bearings of 
that great series of causes célébres which is 
unfortunately not within easy reach of 
readers not happy enough to possess valua- 
ble libraries. . . . Of the importance of this 
subject, or of the want of a book of this 
kind, referring not vaguely but precisely to 
the grounds of constitutional doctrines, both 
of past and present times, no reader of his- 
tory can feel any doubt.”—Dazly News. 


In the Press. 


THE FRAGMENTS OF THE PERPETUAL 
EDICT OF SALVIUS JULIANUS, 


collected, arranged, and annotated by BRYAN WALKER, M.A. LL.D., 
Law Lecturer of St John’s College, and late Fellow of Corpus Christi 


College, Cambridge. 


‘“*This is one of the latest, we believe 
quite the latest, of the contributions made to 
legal scholarship by that revived study of 
the Roman Law at Cambridge which is now 
so marked a feature in the industrial life 
of the University. . . . In the present book 
we have the fruits of the same kind of 
thorough and well-ordered study which was 
brought to bear upon the notes to the Com- 


Crown 8vo., Cloth, Price 6s. 


mentaries and the Institutes . . . Hitherto 
the Edict has been almost inaccessible to 
the ordinary English student, and such a 
student will be interested as well as perhaps 
surprised to find how abundantly the extant 
fragments illustrate and clear up points which 
have attracted his attention in the Commen- 
taries, or the Institutes, or the Digest.”— 
Law Times. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


16 PUBLICATIONS OF 





THE COMMENTARIES OF GAIUS AND RULES 
OF ULPIAN. (New Edition, revised and enlarged.) 
With a Translation and Notes, by J. T. ABpy, LL.D., Judge of County 
Courts, late Regius Professor of Laws in the University of Cambridge, 
and BRYAN WALKER, M.A., LL.D., Law Lecturer of St John’s 
College, Cambridge, formerly Law Student of Trinity Hall and 

Chancellor’s Medallist for Legal Studies. Crown 8vo. 16s. 


“* As scholars and as editors Messrs Abdy explanation. Thus the Roman jurist is 


and Walker have done their work well. 
. -... For one thing the editors deserve 
special commendation. They have presented 
Gaius to the reader with few notes and those 
merely by way of reference or necessary 


allowed to speak for himself, and the reader 
feels that he is really studying Roman law 
in the original, and not a fanciful representa- 
tion of it.”—A theneum. 


THE INSTITUTES OF JUSTINIAN, 


translated with Notes by J. T. Abby, LL.D., Judge of County Courts, 
late Regius Professor of Laws in the University of Cambridge, and 
formerly Fellow of Trinity Hall; and BRYAN WALKER, M.A., LL.D., 
Law Lecturer of St John’s College, Cambridge; late Fellow and 
Lecturer of Corpus Christi College; and formerly Law Student of 
Trinity Hall. Crown 8vo. 16s. 


** We welcome here a valuable contribution 
to the study of jurisprudence. The text of 
the /ustitutes is occasionally perplexing, even 
to practised scholars, whose knowledge of 
classical models does not always avail them 
in dealing with the technicalities of legal 
phraseology. Nor can the ordinary diction- 
aries be expected to furnish all the help that 
is wanted. This translation will then be of 
great use. To the ordinary student, whose 


attention is distracted from the subject-matter 
by the difficulty of struggling through the 
language in which it is contained, it will be 
almost indispensable.” —Sfectator. 

‘The notes are learned and carefully com- 
piled, and this edition will be found useful 
to students.”—Law Times. 

**Dr Abdy and Dr Walker have produced 
a book which is both elegant and useful.”— 
Atheneum. 


SELECTED TITLES FROM THE DIGEST, 


annotated by B. WALKER, M.A., LL.D. Part I. 
Crown 8vo. Cloth. 5s. 


Contra. Digest XVII. I. 


**This small volume is published as an ex- 
periment. The author proposes to publish an 
annotated edition and translation of several 
books of the Digest if this one is received 
with favour. We are pleased to be able to 


Mandati vel 


say that Mr Walker deserves credit for the 
way in which he has performed the task un- 
dertaken. The translation, as might be ex- 
pected, is scholarly.” Law Times. 


Part II. De Adquirendo rerum dominio and De Adquirenda vel amit- 
tenda possessione. Digest XLI. 1 and 11. Crown 8vo. Cloth. 6s. 


Part III. De Condictionibus. Digest XII. 1 and 4—7 and Digest XIII. 
1—3. Crown 8vo. Cloth. 6s. ‘ . 


GROTIUS DE JURE BELLI ET PACIS, 


with the Notes of Barbeyrac and others ; accompanied by an abridged 
Translation of the Text, by W. WHEWELL, D.D. late Master of Trinity 
College. 3 Vols. Demy 8vo. 12s. The translation separate, 6s. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 17 





\ 


HISTORY. 


LIFE AND TIMES OF STEIN, OR GERMANY 
AND PRUSSIA IN THE NAPOLEONIC AGE, 


by J. R. SEELEY, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern History in 


the University of Cambridge, with Portraits and Maps. 


Demy 8vo. 48s. 


‘If we could conceive anything similar 
to a protective system in the intellectual de- 
partment, we might perhaps look forward to 
a time when our historians would raise the 
cry of protection for native industry. Of 
the unquestionably greatest German men of 
modern history—I speak of Frederick the 
Great, Goethe and Stein—the first two found 
long since in Carlyle and Lewes biographers 


who have undoubtedly driven their German , 


competitors out of the field. And now in the 
ng just past Professor Seeley of Cambridge 

as presented us with a biography of Stein 
which, though it modestly declines competi- 
tion with German works and disowns the 
Permits of teaching us Germans our own 

istory, yet casts into the shade by its bril- 
liant superiority all that we have ourselves 
hitherto written about Stein.... In five long 
chapters Seeley expounds the legislative and 
administrative reforms, the emancipation of 
the person and the soil, the beginnings of 
free administration and free trade, in short 
the foundation of modern Prussia, with more 
exhaustive thoroughness, with more pene- 
trating insight, than any one had done be- 
fore.” —Deutsche Rundschau. 

“Dr Busch’s volume has made people 
think and talk even more than usual of Prince 
Bismarck, and Professor Seeley’s very learned 
work on Stein will turn attention to an earlier 
and an almost equally eminent German states- 
TRAB iran hier Sic It is soothing to the national 
self-respect to find a few Englishmen, such 
as the late Mr Lewes and Professor Seeley, 


3 Vols. 


doing for German as well as English readers 
what many German scholars have done for 
us. 


be done to a work like the one before us; no 
short résumé can give even the most meagre 
notion of the contents of these volumes, which 
contain no page that is superfluous, and 
none that is uninteresting. .... To under- 
stand the Germany of to-day one must stu€y 
the Germany of many yesterdays, and now 
that study has been made easy by this work, . 
to which no one can hesitate to assign a very 
high place among those recent histories which 
have aimed at original research.”—<A the- 


24772. 

‘The book before us fills an important 
gap in English—nay, European—historical 
literature, and bridges over the history of 
Prussia from the time of Frederick the Great 
to the days of Kaiser Wilhelm. It thus gives 
the reader standing ground whence he may 
regard contemporary events in Germany in 
their proper historic light... .. e con- 
gratuite Cambridge and her Professor of 

istory on the appearance of such a note- 
worthy production. And we may add that it 
is something upon which we may congratulate 
England that on the especial field of the Ger- 
mans, history, on the history of their own 
country, by the use of their own literary 
weapons, an Englishman has produced a his- 
tory of Germany in the Napoleonic age far 
superior to any that exists in German,”— 
Examiner. 


THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE FROM 
we weebtS lf’. TIMES: TO: -THE. ROYAL 
INJUNCTIONS OF 1535, 
by JAMES BAss MULLINGER, M.A. Demy 8vo. cloth (734 pp.), 12s. 


‘*We trust Mr Mullinger will yet continue 
his history and bring it down to our own 
day.”—Academy. 

‘**He has brought together a mass of in- 
structive details respecting the rise and pro- 
gress, not only of his own University, but of 
all the principal Universities of the Middle 


Ages...... We hope some day that he may 
continue his labours, and give us a history of 
VoL. II. 


the University during the troublous times of 
the Reformation and the Civil War.”—A zhe- 


une. 
““Mr Mullinger’s work is one of great 
learning and research, which can hardly fail 
to become a standard book of reference on 
the subject.... We can most strongly recom- 
mend this book to our readers.” —Sfectator. 


In the Press. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


18 PUBLICATIONS OF 





HISTORY OF THE COLLEGE OF ST JOHN 
THE EVANGELIST, 


by THOMAS BAKER, B.D., Ejected Fellow. 


Edited by JOHN E. B. 


Mayor, M.A., Fellow of St John’s. Two Vols. Demy 8vo. 245. 


**To antiquaries the book will be a source 
of almost inexhaustible amusement, by his- 
torians it will be found a work of considerable 
service on questions respecting our social 
progress in past times; and the care and 
thoroughness with which Mr Mayor has dis- 
charged his editorial functions are creditable 
to his learning and industry.”—A theneum. 


“The work displays very wide reading, 
and it will be of great use to members of the 
college and of the university, and, perhaps, 
of still greater use to students of English 
history, ecclesiastical, political, social, literary 
and academical, who have hitherto had to be 
content with ‘ Dyer.’”—Academy. 


HISTORY OF NEPAL, 


translated by MUNSHI SHEW SHUNKER SINGH and PANDIT SHRI 
GUNANAND; edited with an Introductory Sketch of the Country and 
People by Dr D. WRIGHT, late Residency Surgeon at Kathmandi, 
and with facsimiles of native drawings, and portraits of Sir JUNG 


BAHADUR, the KING OF NEPAL, &c. 


**The Cambridge University Press have 
done well in publishing this work. Such 
translations are valuable not only to the his- 
torian but also to the ethnologist;...... Dr 
Wright’s Introduction is based on personal 
inquiry and observation, is written intelli- 
gently and candidly, and adds much to the 
value of the volume. The coloured litho- 


Super-royal 8vo. Price 21s. 


graphic plates are interesting.” —Wature. 
*“'The history has appeared at a very op- 
portune moment... The volume...is beautifully 
printed, and supplied with portraits of Sir 
pang Bahadoor and others, and with excel- 
ent coloured sketches illustrating Nepaulese 
architecture and religion.”—Z xamiiner. 


SCHOLAE ACADEMICAE: 


Some Account of the Studies at the English Universities in the 


Eighteenth Century. 


By CHRISTOPHER WORDSWORTH, M.A., 


Fellow of Peterhouse; Author of “Social Life at the English 


Universities in the Eighteenth Century.” 


“The general object of Mr Wordsworth’s 
book is sufficiently apparent from its title. 
He has collected a great quantity of minute 
and curious information about the working 
of Cambridge institutions in the last century, 
with an occasional comparison of the corre- 
sponding state of things at Oxford....To a 
great extent it is purely a book of reference, 
and as such it will be of permanent value 
for the historical knowledge of English edu- 
cation and learning.” —Saturday Review. 

*¢ The particulars Mr Wordsworth gives us 
in his excellent arrangement are most varied, 
interesting, and instructive. Among the mat- 
ters touched upon are Libraries, Lectures, 
the Tripos, the Trivium, the Senate House, 
the Schools, text-books, subjects of study, 
foreign opinions, interior life. We learn 
even of the various University periodicals 


Demy 8vo. cloth. I5s. 
that have had their day. And last, but not 
least, we are given in an appendix a highly 
interesting series of private letters from a 
Cambridge student to John Strype, giving 
a vivid idea of life as an undergraduate and 
afterwards, as the writer became a graduate 
and a fellow.”—University Magazine. 
“Only those who have engaged in like la- 
bours will be able fully to appreciate the 
sustained industry and conscientious accuracy 
discernible in every page.... Of the whole 
volume it may be said that it is a genuine 
service rendered to the study of University 
history, and that the habits of thought of any 
writer educated at either seat of learning in 
the last century will, in many cases, be far 
better understood after a consideration of the 
materials here collected.”—Academzy. 


THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF THE 
UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGES OF CAMBRIDGE, 
By the late Professor WILLIS, M.A. With numerous Maps, Plans, 


and Illustrations. 


Continued to the present time, and edited 


by JOHN WILLIS CLARK, M.A., formerly Fellow 


of Trinity College, Cambridge. 


[Zz the Press. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 19 





MISCELLANEOUS. 


LECTURES ON 


TEACHING, 


Delivered in the University of Cambridge in the Lent Term, 1880, 
By J. G. Fircu, M.A., Her Majesty’s Inspector of Schools. 
Second Edition, Revised. Crown 8vo. cloth. 6s. 


““The lectures will be found most in- 
teresting, and deserve to be carefully studied, 
not only by persons directly concerned with 
instruction, but by parents who wish to be 
able to exercise an intelligent judgment in 
the choice of schools and teachers for their 
children. For ourselves, we could almost 
wish to be of school age again, to learn 
history and geography from some one whe 
could teach them after the pattern set by 
Mr Fitch to his audience...... But perhaps 
Mr Fitch’s observations on the general con- 
ditions of school-work are even more im- 
portant than what he says on this or that 
branch of study.” —Saturday Review. 

**Tt comprises fifteen lectures, dealing 
with such subjects as organisation, discipline, 
examining, language, fact knowledge, science, 
and methods of instruction; and though the 
lectures make no pretention to systematic or 
exhaustive treatment, they yet leave very 
little of the ground uncovered; and they 
combine in an admirable way the exposition 
of sound principles with practical suggestions 
and illustrations which are evidently derived 
from wide and varied experience, both in 
teaching and in examining. While Mr Fitch 
addresses himself specially to secondary 
school-masters, he does not by any means 
disregard or ignore the needs of the primary 
school.” —Scotsman. 

**Tt would be difficult to find a lecturer 
better qualified to discourse upon the prac- 
tical aspects of the teacher’s work than Mr 
Fitch. He has had very wide and varied 
experience as a teacher, a training college 
officer, an Inspector of schools, and as 
Assistant Commissioner to the late En- 
dowed Schools Commission. While it is 
difficult for anyone to make many original 
remarks on this subject Mr Fitch is able to 
speak with authority upon various contro- 
verted points, and to give us the results of 
many years’ study, corrected by the obser- 
vation of the various schemes and methods 
pursued in schools of all grades and cha- 
racters.”—The Schoolmaster. 

‘*All who are interested in the manage- 
ment of schools, and all who have made the 
profession of a teacher the work of their lives, 
will do well to study with care these results 
of a large experience and of wide observa- 
tion. It is not, we are told, a manual of 
method; rather, we should say, it is that 
and much more. As a manual of method 
it is far superior to anything we have seen. 
Its suggestions of practical means and me- 
thods are very valuable; but it has an ele- 
ment which a mere text-book of rules for 
imparting knowledge does not contain. Its 
tone is lofty; its spirit religious; its ideal of 


the teacher’s aim and life pure and good ... 
The volume is one of great practical value. 
It should be in the hands of every teacher, 
and of every one preparing for the office of a 
teacher. ‘There are many besides these who 
will find much in it to interest and instruct 
them, more especially parents who have chil- 
dren whom they can afford to keep at school 
till their eighteenth or nineteenth year.”— 
The Nonconformist and Independent. 

‘* As principal of a training college and as 
a Government inspector of schools, Mr Fitch 
has got at his fingers’ ends the working of 
primary education, while as assistant com- 
missioner to the late Endowed Schools Com- 
mission he has seen something of the ma- 
chinery of our higher schools. . . . Mr 
Fitch’s book covers so wide a field and 
touches on so many burning questions that 
we must be content to recommend it as the 
best existing vade mecum for the teacher. 
. . « He is always sensible, always judicious, 
never wanting in tact... . Mr Fitchisa 
scholar ; he pretends to no knowledge that 
he does not possess; he brings to his work 
the ripe experience of a well-stored mind, 
and he possesses in a remarkable degree the 
art of exposition.”—Pal/ Mall Gazette. 

**In his acquaintance with all descrip- 
tions of schools, their successes and their 
shortcomings, Mr Fitch has great advantages 
both in knowledge and experience; and if his 
work receives the attention it deserves, it 
will tend materially to improve and equalize 
the methods of teaching in our schools, to 
whatever class they may belong.”— SZ 
Fames s Gazette. 

‘In no other work in the English language, 
so far as we know, are the principles and 
methods which most conduce to successful 
teaching laid down and illustrated with such 

recision and fulness of detail as they are 
ere,”—Leeds Mercury. 

‘*The book is replete with practical 
sagacity, and contains on almost all points 
of interest to the teaching profession sug- 
gestive remarks resting evidently on a wide 
and thoughtful experience of school methods. 
There are few teachers who will not find 
aids to reflection in the careful analysis of 
the qualities required for success in teaching, 
in the admirable exposition of the value of 
orderly, methodical arrangement both for 
instruction and discipline, and in the pains- 
taking discussion of school punishments, 
contained in the earlier section of the 
volume. ... We recommend it in all con- 
fidence to those who are interested in the 
problems with which the teaching profession 
has to deal.” —Galignani’s Messenger. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row, 


20 PUBLICATIONS OF 


THE GROWTH OF ENGLISH INDUSTRY 
AND COMMERCE, 
by W. CUNNINGHAM, M.A., late Deputy to the Knightbridge Pro- 
fessor in the University of Cambridge. [Nearly ready. 


A GRAMMAR OF THE IRISH LANGUAGE. 
By Prof. WINDISCH. Translated by Dr NORMAN MOORE, 
[lz the Press. 


STATUTA ACADEMIZZ CANTABRIGIENSIS. 


Demy 8vo. 2s. sewed. 


ORDINATIONES ACADEMIA CANTABRIGIENSIS. 
Demy $8vo. cloth. 35. 6d. 


TRUSTS, STATUTES AND DIRECTIONS affecting 
(1) The Professorships of the University. (2) The Scholarships and 
Prizes. (3) Other Gifts and Endowments. Demy 8vo. 5s. 

COMPENDIUM OF UNIVERSITY REGULATIONS, 


for the use of persons in Statu Pupillari. Demy 8vo.. 6d. 


CATALOGUE OF THE HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS 
preserved in the University Library, Cambridge. By Dr S. M. 
SCHILLER-SZINESSY. Volume I. containing Section I. Zhe Holy 
Scriptures; Section 11. Commentaries on the Bible. Demy 8vo. 9s. 
A CATALOGUE OF THE MANUSCRIPTS 
reserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge. Demy 
Ey 5 Vols. 10s. each. 


INDEX TO THE CATALOGUE. Demy 8vo. Ios. 
A CATALOGUE OF ADVERSARIA and printed 


books containing MS. notes, preserved in the Library of the University 

of Cambridge. 3s. 6d. 

THE ILLUMINATED MANUSCRIPTS IN THE 
LIBRARY OF THE FITZWILLIAM MUSEUM, 


Catalogued with Descriptions, and an Introduction, by WILLIAM 
GEORGE SEARLE, M.A., late Fellow of Queens’ College, and Vicar of 
Hockington, Cambridgeshire. Demy 8vo. 7s. 6d, 


A CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF THE GRACES, 


Documents, and other Papers in the University Registry which con- 
cern the University Library. Demy 8vo. 2s. 6d. 


CATALOGUS BIBLIOTHECAE BURCKHARD- 
TIANA. Demy 4to. 5s. 








London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Faternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 21 





Che Cambridge Bible for Schools. 


GENERAL EDITOR: J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., DEAN OF 
PETERBOROUGH. 


—— 


THE want of an Annotated Edition of the BIBLE, in handy portions, 
suitable for School use, has long been felt. 


In order to provide Text-books for School and Examination pur- 
poses, the CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PREss has arranged to publish the 
several books of the BIBLE in separate portions at a moderate price, 
with introductions and explanatory notes. 


The Very Reverend J. J. S. PERownzE, D.D., Dean of Peter- 
borough, has undertaken the general editorial supervision of the work, 
and will be assisted by a staff of eminent coadjutors. Some of the 
books have already been undertaken by the following gentlemen : 


Rev. A. CARR, M.A., Assistant Master at Wellington College. 

Rev. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. 

Rey. S. Cox, Nottingham. 

Rey. A. B. DAvipson, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Edinburgh. 

Rev. F. W. FARRAR, D.D., Canon of Westminster. 

Rey. A. E. HumMpHREys, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 

Rev. A. F. KIRKPATRICK, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College. 

Rey. J. J. Lias, M.A., date Professor at St David's College, Lampeter. 

Rev. J. R. Lumby, D.D., Norrisian Professor of Divinity. 

Rev. G. F. MAcLEAR, D.D., Warden of St Augustine’s Coll., Canterbury. 

Rev. H. C. G. Moute, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Principal of 
Ridley Hall, Cambridge. ) 

Rey. W. F. Moutton, D.D., Head Master of the Leys School, Cambridge. 

Rey. E. H. PERowWNE, D.D., Master of Corpus Christi College, Cam- 

| bridge, Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of St Asaph. 

The Ven. T. T. PEROWNE, M.A., Archdeacon of Norwich. 

Rev. A. PLUMMER, M.A., Master of University College, Durham. 

The Very Rev. E. H. PLumptre, D.D., Dean of Wells. 

Rev. W. SANDAY, M.A., Principal of Bishop Hatfield Hall, Durham. 

Rev. W. Stmcox, M.A., Rector of Weyhill, Hants. 

Rev. W. ROBERTSON SMITH, M.A., Zdinburgh. 

Rev. A. W. STREANE, M.A., Fellow of Corpus Christi Coll., Cambridge 

The Ven. H. W. Warkins, M.A., Archdeacon of Northumberland. 

Rev. G. H. WHITAKER, M.A., Fellow of St Fohn’s College, Cambridge. 

Rey. C. WoRDsworTH, M.A., Rector of Glaston, Rutland. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


22 PUBLICATIONS OF 





THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS.—Condinued, 


Now Ready. Cloth, Extra Feap. 8vo. 


THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. Edited by Rev. G. F. 
MACLEAR, D.D. With 2 Maps. 2s. 6d. 

THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. By the Rev. 
A, F. KiRKPATRICK, M.A. With Map. 3s. 6d. 

THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL. By the Rey. 
A. F. Kirkpatrick, M.A. With 2 Maps. 35. 6d. 

THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES. By the Very Rev. 
E. H. PLumpTRE, D.D., Dean of Wells. 55. 

THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH. By the Rev. A. W. 
STREANE, M.A. 4s. 6d. 

THE BOOK OF JONAH. By Archdn. PERowneE. 1s. 6d. 

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MATTHEW. 
Edited by the Rev. A. Carr, M.A. With 2 Maps. 25. 64. 

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MARK. Edited 
by the Rey. G. F. MAcLEAR, D.D. With 4 Maps. 2s. 6d. 

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST LUKE. By 
the Rev. F. W. Farrar, D.D. With 4 Maps. 45. 6d. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST JOHN. By 
the Rev. A. PLUMMER, M.A. With Four Maps. 4s. 6d. 


THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. By the Rev. 
Professor LuMBy, D.D. Part I. Chaps. I—XIV. With 2 Maps. 
25. 6d. 
Part II. Chaps. XV. to end. Vearly ready. 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. By the Rev. 
H. C. G. Moule, M.A. 35. 6d. 

THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
By the Rey. J. J. Lias, M.A. Witha Map and Plan. 25, 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 

By the Rev. J. J. Litas, M.A. 25. 

THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF ST JAMES. By the 
Very Rev. E. H. PLuMpTrRE, D.D., Dean of Wells. 1s. 6d. 
THE EPISTLES OF ST PETER AND ST JUDE. 

By the same Editor. 2s. 6d. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row, 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 23: 





THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS.—Continued. 


Preparing. 
THE BOOK OF JUDGES. By the Rev. J. J. Las, M.A. 
[Zimmediately. 


THE BOOKS OF HAGGAI AND ZECHARIAH. By 


Archdeacon PEROWNE. 


THE BOOK OF MICAH. By the Rev. T. K. CHEyne, 
M.A. 





THE CAMBRIDGE GREEK TESTAMENT, 
FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES, 


with a Revised Text, based on the most recent critical authorities, and 
English Notes, prepared under the direction of the General Editor, 


THE VERY REVEREND J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., 
DEAN OF PETERBOROUGH. 


Now Ready. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST MATTHEW. By the 
Rev. A. CARR, M.A. With 4 Maps. 45. 6d. 


‘With the ‘Notes,’ in the volume before us, we are much pleased; so far as we have 
searched, they are scholarly and sound. The quotations from the Classics are apt; and the 
references to modern Greek form a pleasing feature.”’—The Churchman. 

‘“*Mr Carr, whose ‘Notes on St Luke’s Gospel’ must have thoroughly approved thems 
selves to all who have used them, has followed the same line in this volume of St Matthew. 
In both works a chief object has been ‘to connect more closely the study of the Classics 
with the reading of the New Testament.’.... Copious illustrations, gathered from a great 
variety of sources, make his notes a very valuable aid to the student. They are indeed re- 
markably interesting, while all explanations on meanings, applications, and the like are 
distinguished by their lucidity and good sense.”——-Pall Madi Gazette. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST LUKE. By the 


Rev. F. W. FARRAR, D.D. [Preparing. 
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST JOHN. By the Rev. 
A. PLUMMER, M.A. [lz the Press. 


The books will be published separately, as in the “Cambridge Bible 
for Schools.” 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row, 


24 PUBLICATIONS OF 


THE PATTI PRESS SERTES. 


l. GREEK. 


THE ANABASIS OF XENOPHON, Book IV. With 
a Map and English Notes by ALFRED PRETOR, M.A., Fellow of 
St Catharine’s College, Cambridge ; Editor of Persius and Cicero ad Atticum 
Book 1. Price 25. 

**In Mr Pretor’s edition of the Anabasis the text of Kiihner has been followed in the main, 
while the exhaustive and admirable notes of the great German editor have been largely utilised. 
These notes deal with the minutest as well as the most important difficulties in construction, and 
- questions of history, antiquity, and geography are briefly but very effectually elucidated.”— The 

xaminer. 

““We welcome this addition to the other books of the Azaédasis so ably edited by Mr Pretor. 
Although originally intended for the use of candidates at the university local examinations, yet 
this edition will be found adapted not only to meet the wants of the junior student, but even 
advanced scholars will find much in this work that will repay its perusal.” —7 he Schoolmaster. 


BOOKS I. III. & V. By the same Editor. 2s. each. 
BOOKS II. VI.and VII. By the same Editor. 2s. 6a. each. 


“‘Mr Pretor’s ‘ Anabasis of Xenophon, Book IV.’ displays a union of accurate Cambridge 
scholarship, with experience of what is required by learners gained in examining middle-class 
schools. The text is large and clearly printed, and the notes explain all difficulties. Mr 
Pretor’s notes seem to be all that could be wished as regards erammar, geography, and ‘other 
matters.”—The Academy. 

** Another Greek text, designed it would seem for students preparing for the local examinations, 
is ‘Xenophon’s Anabasis,’ Book II., with English Notes, by Alfred Pretor, M.A. The editor has 
exercised his usual discrimination in utilising the text ‘and notes of Kuhner, with the occasional 
assistance of the best hints of Schneider, Vollbrecht and Macmichael on critical matters, and of 
Mr R. W. Taylor on points of history and geography. _. . When Mr Pretor commits himself to 
Commentator’s work, he is eminently helpful. . . Had we to introduce a young Greek scholar 
to Xenophon, we should esteem ourselves fortunate in having Pretor’s text-book as our chart and 
guide.”—Contemporary Review. 


THE ANABASIS OF XENOPHON, by A. PRETOR, M.A., 


Text and Notes, complete in two Volumes. Price 7s. 6d. 


AGESILAUS OF XENOPHON. The Text revised 
with Critical and Explanatory Notes, Introduction, Analysis, and Indices. 
By H. HAILsTongE, M.A., late Scholar of Peterhouse, Cambridge, Editor of 
Xenophon’s Hellenics, etc. 25. 6d. 


ARISTOPHANES—RANAE. With English Notes and 
ae neon by W. C. GREEN, M.A., Assistant Master at Rugby School. 
35. 6d. 


ARISTOPHANES—AVES. By the same Editor. Mew 
Edition. 35. 6d. 


‘*The notes to both plays are excellent. Much has been done in these two volumes to render 
the study of Aristophanes a real treat to a boy instead of a drudgery, by helping him to under- 
stand the fun and to express it in his mother tongue.”—The Examiner. 


ARISTOPHANES—PLUTUS. By the same Editor. 3s. 6d. 


EURIPIDES. HERCULES FURENS. With Intro- 
ductions, Notes and Analysis. By J. T. HuTcuinson, M.A., Christ’s College, 
and A. GRAY, M.A., Fellow of Jesus College. 25. 


“Messrs Hutchinson and Gray have produced a careful and useful edition.”—Saturday 
Review. 


THE HERACLEIDA OF EURIPIDES, with Introduc- 
tion and Critical Notes by E. A. Beck, M.A., Fellow of Trinity Hall. 35. 6d. 











London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 25 


LUCIANI SOMNIUM CHARON PISCATOR ET DE 


LUCTU, with English Notes by W. E. HEITLAND, M.A., Fellow of 
St John’s College, Cambridge. New Edition, with Appendix. 35. 6d. 


ll. LATIN. : 
M. T. CICERONIS DE AMICITIA. Edited by J. S. 


Rep, M.L., Fellow and Assistant Tutor of Gonville and Caius College, 
Cambridge. Price 35. 

**Mr Reid has decidedly attained his aim, namely, ‘a thorough examination of the Latinity 
of the dialogue.’..... The revision of the text is most valuable, and comprehends sundry 
acute corrections.... This volume, like Mr Reid’s other editions, is a solid gain to the scholar- 
ship of the country.” —A thexeum. 

‘A more distinct gain to scholarship is Mr Reid’s able and thorough edition of the De 
Amicitia of Cicero, a work of which, whether we regard the exhaustive introduction or the 
instructive and most suggestive commentary, it would be difficult to speak too highly. . . . When 
we come to the commentary, we are only amazed by its fulness in proportion to its bulk. 
Nothing is overlooked which can tend to enlarge the learner’s general knowledge of Ciceronian 
Latin or to elucidate the text.”— Saturday Review. 


M. T. CICERONIS CATO MAJOR DE SENECTUTE. 
Edited by J.S. Rem, M.L. Price 35. 62. 


‘The notes are excellent and scholarlike, adapted for the upper forms of public schools, and 
likely to be useful even to more advanced students.”—Guardian. 


M. T. CICERONIS ORATIO PRO ARCHIA POETA. 
Edited by J. S. Reip, M.L. Price 1s. 6d. 


‘** Tt is an admirable specimen of careful editing. An Introduction tells us everything we could 
wish to know about Archias, about Cicero’s connexion with him, about the merits of the trial, and 
the genuineness of the speech. The text is well and carefully printed. The notes are clear and 
scholar-like. . . . No boy can master this little volume without feeling that he has advanced a long 
step in scholarship.”—-T'he Academy. 


M. T. CICERONIS PRO L. CORNELIO BALBO ORA- 
TIO. Edited by J. S. Rep, M.L. Fellow of Caius College, Cambridge. 
Price ts. 6d. 

*€ We are bound to recognize the pains devoted in the annotation of these two orations to the 
minute and thorough study of their Latinity, both in the ordinary notes and in the textual 
appendices.”—Saturday Review. 


Mo fe CL RONIS: “PROP. CORNEEIO" SULLA 
ORATIO. Edited by J. S. Remp, M.L. [Zn the Press. 


M. T. CICERONIS PRO CN. PLANCIO ORATIO. 
Edited by H. A. HotpEen, LL.D., Head Master of Ipswich School. 
Price 4s. 6d. 

** As a book for students this edition can have few rivals, It is enriched by an excellent intro- 
duction and a chronological table of the principal events of the life of Cicero; while in its ap- 
pendix, and in the notes on the text which are added, there is much of the greatest value. Tune 
volume is neatly got up, and is in every way commendable.”— The Scotsman. 

‘““Dr Holden’s own edition is all that could be expected from his elegant and practised 
scholarship... . Dr Holden has evidéntly made up his mind as to the character of the 
commentary most likely to be generally useful; and he has carried out his views with admirable 
thoroughness.”—A cademy. 

‘Dr Holden has given us here an excellent edition. The commentary is even unusually full 
and complete; and after going through it carefully, we find little or nothing to criticize. There 
is an excellent introduction, lucidly explaining the circumstances under which the speech was 
delivered, a table of events in the life of Cicero and a useful index.”” Sfectator, Oct. 29, 1881. 


M. T. CICERONIS IN Q. CAECILIUM DIVINATIO 
ET IN C. VERREM ACTIO PRIMA. With Introduction and Notes 
by W. E. HEITLAND, M.A., and HERBERT COWIE, M.A., Fellows of 
St John’s College, Cambridge. Price 35. 











London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


26 . PUBLICATIONS OF 





M. T. CICERONIS ORATIO PRO L. MURENA, with 
English Introduction and Notes. By W. E. HEITLAND, M.A., Fellow 
and Classical Lecturer of St John’s College, Cambridge. Second Edition, 
carefully revised. Price 35. 

**Those students are to be deemed fortunate who have to read Cicero’s lively and brilliant 
oration for L. Murena with Mr Heitland’s handy edition, which may be pronounced ‘four-square’ 


in point of equipment, and which has, not without good reason, attained the honours of a 
second edition.”—Saturday Review. 


M. T. CICERONIS IN GAIUM VERREM ACTIO 


PRIMA. With Introduction and Notes. By H. Cowikz, M.A., Fellow 
of St John’s College, Cambridge. Price 15. 6d. 


M. T. CICERONIS ORATIO PRO T. A. MILONE, 
with a Translation of Asconius’ Introduction, Marginal Analysis and 
English Notes. Edited by the Rev. JOHN SMYTH PuRTON, B.D., late 


President and Tutor of St Catharine’s College. Price 2s. 6d. 
**Yhe editorial work is excellently done.”—TZhe Academy. 


P. OVIDII NASONIS FASTORUM LIster VI. With 
a Plan of Rome and Notes by A. SipGwick, M.A. Tutor of Corpus Christi 
College, Oxford. Price 1s. 6d. 


**Mr Sidgwick’s editing of the Sixth Book of Ovid’s Fas¢i furnishes a careful and serviceable 
volume for average students. It eschews ‘construes’ which ee EF the use of the dictionary, 
but gives full explanation of grammatical usages and historical and mythical allusions, besides 
illustrating peculiarities of style, true and false derivations, and the more remarkable variations of 
the text.”—Saturday Review. 


**Tt is eminently good and useful. . . . The Introduction is singularly clear on the astronomy of 
Ovid, which is properly shown to be ignorant and confused; there is an excellent little map of 
Rome, giving just the places mentioned in the text and no more; the notes are evidently written 
by a practical schoolmaster.” — The Academy. 


GAI IULI CAESARIS DE BELLO GALLICO COM- 
MENT. I. II. With English Notes and Map by A. G. PEsKETT, M.A., 
Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge, Editor of Caesar De Bello Gallico, 
VII. Price 2s. 6d. 


GAI IULI CAESARIS DE BELLO GALLICO COM- 
MENT. III. With Map and Notes by A. G. PESKETT, M.A., Fellow 
of Magdalene College, Cambridge. rice 15. 6d. 


**Tn an unusually succinct introduction he gives all the preliminary and collateral information 
that is likely to be useful to a young student; and, wherever we have examined his notes, we 
have found them eminently practical and satisfying. .. The book may well be recommended for 
careful study in school or college.” —Saturday Review. 


“The notes are scholarly, short, and a real help to the most elementary beginners in Latin 
prose.” —The Examiner. 


BOOKS IV. AND V. AND Book VII. by the same Editor. 


Price 2s. each. 


BOOK VI. by the same Editor. [Nearly ready. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 27 





P. VERGILI MARONIS AENEIDOS Lizer II. Edited 


with Notes by A. SipGwick, M.A. Tutor of Corpus Christi College, 
Oxford. ts. 6d. 


BOOKS IV., V., VI., VIL, VIII., X., XI., XII. by the same 
Editor. 1s. 6d. each. 

**Mr Arthur Sidgwick’s ‘ Vergil, Aeneid, Book XII.’ is worthy of his reputation, and is dis- 
tinguished by the same acuteness and accuracy of knowledge, appreciation of a boy’s difficulties 
and ingenuity and resource in meeting them, which we have on other occasions had reason to 
praise in these pages.”—-The Academy, 

** As masterly in its clearly divided preface and appendices as in the sound and independent 
character of its annotations. ... There is a great deal more in the notes than mere compilation 
and suggestion.... No difficulty is left unnoticed or unhandled.”—Saturday Review. 

‘*This edition is admirably adapted for the use of junior students, who will find in it the result 
of much reading in a condensed form, and clearly expressed.” —Cambridge Independent Press. 


BOOKS VII. VIII. in one volume. Price 3s. 
BOOKS X., XI, XII. in one volume. Price 35. 6d. 
OUINTUS CURTIUS. A Portion of the History. 


(ALEXANDER IN INDIA.) By W. E. HEITLAND, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer 
of St John’s College, Cambridge, and T. E. Raven, B.A., Assistant Master 
in Sherborne School. Price 35. 6d. 


**Equally commendable as a genuine addition to the existing stock of school-books is 
Alexander in India, a compilation from the eighth and ninth books of Q. Curtius, edited for 


the Pitt Press by Messrs Heitland and Raven.... The work of Curtius has merits of its 
own, which, in former generations, made it a favourite with English scholars, and which still 
make it a popular text-book in Continental schools. ..... The reputation of Mr Heitland is a 


sufficient guarantee for the scholarship of the notes, which are ample without being excessive, 
and the book is well furnished with all that is needful in the nature of maps, indexes, and ap- 
pendices,” —Academy. 


M. ANNAEI LUCANI PHARSALIAE LIBER 


PRIMUS, edited with English Introduction and Notes by W. E. HEITLAND, 
M.A. and C. E. Haskins, M.A., Fellows and Lecturers of St John’s Col- 
lege, Cambridge. Price 1s. 6d. 


** A careful and scholarlike production.” —7zmes. 
**Tn nice parallels of Lucan:from Latin poets and from Shakspeare, Mr Haskins and Mr 
Heitland deserve praise.”—Saturday Review. 


BEDA’S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, BOOKS 


IIJ., IV., the Text from the very ancient MS. in the Cambridge University 
Library, collated with six other MSS. Edited, with a life from the German of 
EBERT, and with Notes, &c. by J. E. B. Mayor, M.A., Professor of Latin, 
and J. R. LumBy, D.D., Norrisian Professor of Divinity. Vol. I. Revised 
edition. Price 7s. 6d. 

‘To young students of English History the illustrative notes will be of great service, while 
the study of the texts will be a good introduction to Medizval Latin.”—The Nonconformist. 

‘*In Bede’s works Englishmen. can go back to ovigines of their history, unequalled for 
form and matter by any modern European nation. Prof. Mayor has done good service in ren- 
dering a part of Bede’s greatest work accessible to those who can read Latin with ease. He 
has adorned this edition of the third and fourth books of the ‘‘ Ecclesiastical History” with that 
amazing erudition for which he is unrivalled among Englishmen and rarely equalled by Germans. 
And however interesting and valuable the text may be, we can certainly apply to his notes 
the expression, La sauce vaut mieux gue le poisson. ‘They are literally crammed with interest- 
ing information about early English life. For though ecclesiastical in name, Bede’s history treats 
of all parts of the national life, since the Church had ‘points of contact with all.”’—Zxaminer. 


VoL. II. Jn the Press. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


28 PUBLICATIONS OF 





Hl. FRENCH. 


LAZARE HOCHE—PAR EMILE DE BONNECHOSE. 


With Three Maps, Introduction and Commentary, by C. CoLBEcK, M.A., 
late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; Assistant Master at Harrow 
School. Price 25. 


HISTOIRE DU SIJECLE: DE. LOUIS AlV rae 
VOLTAIRE. Part I. Chaps. I.—XIII. Edited with Notes Philological and 
Historical, Biographical and Geographical Indices, etc. by GUSTAVE MASSON, 
B.A. Univ. Gallic., Officier d’Académie, Assistant Master of Harrow School, 
and G. W. PRoTHERO, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of King’s College, Cam- 
bridge. 25. 6d. 


**Messrs Masson and Prothero have, to judge from the first part of their work, performed 
with much discretion and care the task of editing Voltaire’s Szécle de Louis XIV for the ‘ Pitt 
Press Series.’ Besides the usual kind of notes, the editors have in this case, influenced by Vol- 
taire’s ‘summary way of treating much of the history,’ given a good deal of historical informa- 
tion, in which they have, we think, done well. At the beginning of the book will be found 
excellent and succinct accounts of the constitution of the French army and Parliament at the 
period treated of.”—Saturday Review. 


HISTOIRE » DU. SIECLE (DE. LOUIS. ATV tee 
VOLTAIRE. Part II. Chaps. X1V.—X XIV. With Three Maps of the Period, 
Notes Philological and Historical, Biographical and Geographical Indices, 
by G. Masson, B.A. Univ. Gallic., Assistant Master of Harrow. School, and 
G. W. PROTHERO, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of King’s College, Cambridge, 
Price 25. 6d. 


Part III. Chap. XXV. to the end. By the same Editors. 
Price 2s. 6d. 


LE VERRE D’EAU. A Comedy, by SCRIBE. With a 
Biographical Memoir, and Grammatical, Literary and Historical Notes. By 
C. CoLBECK, M.A., late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; Assistant 
Master at Harrow School. rice 2s. 


‘* Tt may be national prejudice, but we consider this edition far superior to any of the series 
which hitherto have been edited exclusively by foreigners. Mr Colbeck seems better to under- 


stand the wants and difficulties of an English boy. ‘The etymological notes especially are admi- 
rable. . . . The historical. notes and introduction are a piece of thorough honest work.”— ¥ournal 
of Education. 


M. DARU, par M. C. A. SAINTE-BEUVE, (Causeries du 
Lundi, Vol. IX.). With Biographical Sketch of the Author, and Notes 
Philological and Historical. By GUSTAVE MASSON, 25. 


LA SUITE DU MENTEUR. A Comedy in Five Acts, 
by P. CoRNEILLE. Edited with Fontenelle’s Memoir of the Author, Voltaire’s 
Critical. Remarks, and Notes Philological and Historical. By GUSTAVE 
MASSON. Price 25. 


LA JEUNE SIBERIENNE. LE LEPREUX DE LA 
CITE D’AOSTE. Tales by CouNT XAVIER DE MAISTRE. With Bio- 
graphical Notice, Critical Appreciations, and Notes. By GusTAVE Masson. 
Price 2s. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 29 





LE DIRECTOIRE. (Considérations sur la Reévolution 
Francaise. Troisiéme et quatriéme parties.) Par MADAME LA BARONNE DE 
STAEL-HOLSTEIN. With a Critical Notice of the Author, a Chronological 
Table, and Notes Historical and Philological, by G. Masson, B.A., and 
G. W. PrRoTHERO, M.A. Revised and enlarged Edition. Price 2s. 

‘* Prussia under Frederick the Great, and France under the Directory, bring us face to face 
respectively with periods of history which it is right should be known thoroughly, and which 
are well treated in the Pitt Press volumes. ‘The latter in particular, an extract from the 
world-known work of Madame de Staél on the French Revolution, is beyond all praise for 
the excellence both of its style and of its matter.”—7zmes, 


DIX ANNEES D’EXIL. LIvRE II. CHAPITRES 1—8. 
Par MADAME LA BARONNE DE STAEL-HOLSTEIN. With.a Biographical 
Sketch of the Author, a Selection of Poetical. Fragments by Madame de 
Staél’s Contemporaries, and Notes Historical and Philological. By GUSTAVE 
Masson. rice 25. 


“The choice made by M. Masson of the second book of the Memoirs of Madame de Staél 
appears specially felicitous. . , . This is likely to be one of the most favoured of M. Masson’s 
editions, and deservedly so.”—Academy. 


FREDEGONDE ET BRUNEHAUT. A Tragedy in Five 
Acts, by N. LEMERcIER. Edited with Notes, Genealogical and Chrono- 
logical Tabies, a Critical Introduction and a Biographical Notice. By 
GusTAVE Masson. Price 25. 


LE VIEUX CELIBATAIRE. A Comedy, by COLLIN 
D’HARLEVILLE. With a Biographical Memoir, and Grammatical, Literary 
and Historical Notes. By the same Editor. Price 25, 


‘“M. Masson is doing good work in introducing learners to some of the less-known French 
play-writers. The arguments are admirably clear, and the notes are not too abundant.”— 
Academy. 


LA METROMANIE, A Comedy, by PrIRon, with a Bio- 


graphical Memoir, and Grammatical, Literary and Historical Notes, By the 
same Editor. Price 25. 


LASCARIS,. ov LES GRECS "DU XV*. SIECLE, 
Nouvelle Historique, par A. F. VILLEMAIN, with a Biographical Sketch of 
the Author, a Selection of Poems on Greece, and Notes Historical and 
Philological. By the same Editor. Price 2s. 





IV. GERMAN. 
ERNST, HERZOG VON SCHWABEN. UHLAND. With 


Introduction and Notes. By H. J. WoLSTENHOLME, B.A. (Lond.), 
Lecturer in German at Newnham College, Cambridge. Price 35. 6d. 


ZOPF UND SCHWERT. Lustspiel in fiinf Aufziigen von 
KaRL GuTzkow. With a Biographical and Historical Introduction, English 
Notes, and an Index. By the same Editor. Price 3. 6d. 


*“We are glad to be able to notice a careful edition of K. Gutzkow’s amusing comedy 
‘Zopf and Schwert’ by Mr J. H. Wolstenholme. ... These notes are abundant and contain 
references to standard grammatical works.”—Academy. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17. Paternoster Row. 


30 PUBLICATIONS OF 





Goethe’s Knabenjahre. (1749—1759.) GOETHE’S BOY- 
HOOD: being the First Three Books of his Autobiography. Arranged 
and Annotated by WILHELM WAGNER, Ph. -D., late Professor at the 
Johanneum, Hamburg. Price 25, 


HAUFF. DAS WIRTHSHAUS IM SPESSART. Edited 
ae A. eh ane Ph. D., Assistant Master at Uppingham School. 
vice 38 


DER OBERHOF. A Tale of Westphalian Life, by KARL 


IMMERMANN. With a Life of Immermann and English Notes, by WILHELM 
WAGNER, Ph.D., late Professor at the Johanneum, Hamburg. /rice 3s. 


A BOOK OF GERMAN DACTYLIC POETRY. Ar- 


ranged and Annotated by the same Editor. Price 3s. 
Der erfte Kreujgug (THE FIRST CRUSADE), by FRIED- 


RICH VON RAUMER. Condensed from the Author’s ‘History of the Hohen- 
staufen’, with a life of RAUMER, two Plans and — Notes. By 
the same Editor. Price 2s. 


** Certainly no more interesting book could be made the subject of examinations. The story 
of the First Crusade has an undying interest. The notes are, onthe whole, good.” —EZducational 
Times. 


BOOK OF BALLADS ON GERMAN HISTORY. 
Arranged and Annotated by the same Editor. Price zs. 


‘*It carries the reader rapidly through some of the most important incidents connected with 
the German race and name, from the invasion of Italy by the Visigoths under their King Alaric, 
down to the Franco-German War and the installation of the present Emperor, The notes supply 
very well the connecting links between the successive periods, and exhibit in its various phases of 
growth and progress, or the reverse, the vast unwieldy mass which constitutes modern Germany.” 
— Times. 


DER STAAT FRIEDRICHS DES GROSSEN. By G. 
FREYTAG. With Notes. By the same Editor. Price 2s. 


**Prussia under Frederick the Great, and France under the Directory, bring us face to face 
respectively with periods of history which it is right should be known thoroughly, and which 
are well treated in the Pitt Press volumes.”— 7zmes. 


GOETHE’S HERMANN AND DOROTHEA. With 


an Introduction and Notes. By the same Editor. Price 35. 
*““The notes are among the best that we know, with the reservation that they are often too 
abundant.”—Academy. 
Das Jahr 1813 (THE YEAR 1813), by F. KOHLRAUSCH. 
With English Notes. By the same Editor. Price 2s. 





V. ENGLISH. 


LOCKE ON EDUCATION. With Introduction and Notes 
by the Rev. R. H. Quick, M.A. Price 35. 6d. 

**The work before us leaves nothing to be desired. It is of convenient form and reasonable 

price, accurately printed, and accompanied by notes which are admirable. There is no teacher 


too young to find this book interesting; there is no teacher too old to find it profitable.”— Zhe 
School Bulletin, New York. 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 17 Paternoster Row. 


THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 31 





THE TWO NOBLE KINSMEN, edited with Intro- 


duction and Notes by the Rev. Professor SKEAT, M.A., formerly Fellow 
of Christ’s College, Cambridge. Price 35. 6d. 


** This edition of a play that is well worth study, for more reasens than one, by so carefula 
scholar as Mr Skeat, deserves a hearty welcome.”—A theneum. 
“Mr Skeat is a conscientious editor, and has left no difficulty unexplained.” — Times. 


BACON’S HISTORY OF THE REIGN OF KING 
HENRY VII. With Notes by the Rev. J. Rawson Lumpy, D.D., Nor- 
risian Professor of Divinity ; late Fellow of St Catharine’s College. Price 35. 


SIR THOMAS MORE’S UTOPIA. With Notes by the 


Rey. J. RAwson LumBy, D.D., Norrisian Professor of Divinity; late Fellow 
of St Catharine’s College, Cambridge. Price 35. 6d. 


‘To enthusiasts in history matters, who are not content with mere facts, but like to pursue 
their investigations behind the scenes, as it were, Professor Rawson Lumby has in the work now 
before us produced a most acceptable contribution to the now constantly increasing store of 
illustrative reading.” —The Cambridge Review. 

‘““To Dr Lumby we must give praise unqualified and unstinted. He has done his work 
admirably. .... Every student of history, bree politician, every social reformer, every one 
interested in literary curiosities, every lover of English should buy and carefully read Dr 
Lumby’s edition of the ‘Utopia.’ We are afraid to say more lest we should be thought ex- 
travagant, and our recommendation accordingly lose part of its force.”— The Teacher. 

“«1t was originally written in Latin and does not find a place on ordinary bookshelves. A very 
great boon has therefore been conferred on the general English reader by the managers of the 
Pitt Press Series, in the issue of a convenient little volume of JZove’s Utopia not in the original 
Latin, but in the quaint Axglish Translation thereof made by Raphe Robynson, which adds a 
linguistic interest to the intrinsic merit of the work. . . . All this has been edited in a most com- 
plete and scholarly fashion by Dr J. R. Lumby, the Norrisian Professor of Divinity, whose name 
alone is a sufficient warrant for its accuracy. It is a real addition to the modern stock of classical 
English literature.”—Guardian. 


SIR THOMAS MORE’S LIFE OF RICHARD III. 
With Notes, &c., by Professor LUMBy. [Nearly ready. 


A SKETCH OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY FROM 
THALES TO CICERO, by JosEpH B. Mayor; M.A., Professor of 
Moral Philosophy at King’s College, London. Price 35. 6d. 


**Tt may safely be affirmed that Mr Mayor has successfully accomplished all that he here sets 
out. His arrangement is admirably methodical, his style is simple but nervous, his knowledge 
of his subject full and accurate, and his analytical expositions lucid and vivid....It' is therefore a 
manual which will prove of great utility to University undergraduates, for whom it was par- 
ticularly prepared, and also for all who study Plato, Aristotle, or other philosophers, in the 
original. Educated readers, generally, will find it an admirable introduction, or epitome, of 
ancient speculative thought, and ‘a key to our present ways of thinking and judging in regard to 
matters of the highest importance.’ ”— The British Mail. 

“In writing this scholarly and attractive sketch, Professor Mayor has had chiefly in view 
‘undergraduates at the University or others who are commencing the study of the philosophical 
works of Cicero or Plato or Aristotle in the original language,’ but also hopes that it ‘may be 
found interesting and useful by educated readers generally, not merely as an introduction to the 
formal history of philosophy, but as supplying a key to our present ways of thinking and judging 
in regard to matters of the highest importance.’’’—Mznd. 

** Professor Mayor contributes to the Pitt Press Series A Sketch of Ancient Philosophy in 
which he has endeavoured to give a general view of the philosophical systems illustrated by the 
genius of the masters of metaphysical and ethical science from Thales to Cicero. In the course 
of his sketch he takes occasion to give concise analyses of Plato’s Republic, and of the Ethics and 
Politics of Aristotle ; and these abstracts will be to some readers not the least useful portions of 
the book. It may be objected against his design in general that ancient philosophy is too vast 
and too deep a subject to be dismissed in a ‘sketch’—that it should be left to those who will make 
it a serious study. But that objection takes no account of the large class of persons who desire 
to know, in relation to present discussions and speculations, what famous men in the whole world 
thought and wrote on these topics. They have not the scholarship which would be necessary for 
original examination of authorities; but they have an intelligent interest in the relations between 
ancient and modern philosophy, and need just such information as Professor Mayor’s sketch will 
give them.”—The Guardian. 


[Other Volumes are in preparation.] 





London: Cambridge Warehouse, 14 Paternoster Row. 


Gnibersity of Cambridae. 
LOCAL EXAMINATIONS. 


Examination Papers, for various years, with the Regulations for the 
Examination.* Demy 8vo. 2s. each, or by Post, 25. 2a. 
Class Lists, for various years, Boys 1s., Girls 6d. 


Annual Reports of the Syndicate, with Supplementary Tables showing 
the success and failure of the Candidates. 2s, each, by Post 2s, 2d. 


HIGHER LOCAL EXAMINATIONS. 


Examination Papers for 1881, 20 which are added the Regulations for 
1882. Demy 8vo. 2s. each, by Post 2s. 2d. 


Reports of the Syndicate. Demy 8vo. Is., by Post Is. 1d 


LOCAL LECTURES SYNDICATE. 


Calendar for the years 1875—9. Fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 
a me 1875—80. a ws 25, 
” ” 1880—81. ” ” LS. 


TEACHERS’ TRAINING SYNDICATE. 


Examination Papers for 1880 and 1881, Zo which are added the Regus 
lations for the Examination. Demy 8vo. 6a., by Post 7d. 


CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY REPORTER. 
Published by Authority. 


Containing all the Official Notices of the University, Reports of 
Discussions in the Schools, and Proceedings of the Cambridge Philo- 
sophical, Antiquarian, and Philological Societies. 3d. weekly. 


CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY EXAMINATION PAPERS. 
These Papers are published in occasional numbers every Term, and in 
volumes for the Academical year. 


Vou. IX. Parts 105 to 119. PAPERS for the Year 1879—8o, 12s. cloth, 
VoL. X. i: 120 tO £393. e * 1880—81, 15s. cloth, 


























Oxford and Cambridge Schools Examinations. 


Papers set in the Examination for Certificates, July, 1879. Préce 1s. 6d. 


List of Candidates who obtained Certificates at the Examinations 
held in 1879 and 1880; and Supplementary Tables. Price 6d. 


Regulations of the Board for 1882. Price 6d. 
Report of the Board for the year ending Oct. 31,1881. Price 1s. 





London: 
CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, 17 PATERNOSTER ROW. 





CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A.; AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


ate tS, 
] Whar har 


aes | 
+ 
i 





' RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 
TOmep 202 Main Library 





LOAN PERIOD 1 {2 3 
HOME USE 


4 5 6 














ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 


Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date. 
Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405 


DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 


——_ 


















































UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY 
FORM NO. DD6 BERKELEY, CA 94720 


YB 40768 


| 


U. C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 


IAA 


CO4¥b1L7?e1e24 





















































































































































ee 


SS WHE NY 


: \ \ » Sy : Sy SS \ SN \ : AX Se S a SSS SoS 


\\ 





